The Merrillville Town Council may acquiesce to Indiana Attorney General Todd Rokita’s threat to sue it over its resolution opposing ICE processing centers after all, and the town’s finances are behind the decision.
The council at its July 14 meeting will consider a second resolution that rescinds Resolution 26-02, Council President Rick Bella, D-5, confirmed Wednesday. The new resolution, of which the Post-Tribune received a copy, also “addresses interference with real estate transactions as it relates to ICE operations within town boundaries,” and clarifies to Merrillville property owners that the town won’t oppose ICE acquiring property within it.
“Whereas, since (Rokita) has asked the Town of Merrillville to take steps at the soonest possible date to bring the Town into compliance with state law, the town will take the following steps: 1. Rescind Resolution No. 26-02 by the passage of Resolution 26-34; 2. Discontinue any efforts to discourage or thwart real estate transactions between federal authorities and Merrillville property owners; and 3. Issue a public statement (by way of the passage of this Resolution) that makes clear to Merrillville property owners that the Town will not oppose any attempt by ICE to acquire property within Merrillville and will not retaliate against any entity or individual that engages in or facilitates a real estate transaction with ICE,” the resolution reads.
When asked why the change in direction, Bella said he was the one who asked for the rescinding resolution and that it addresses Rokita’s letter.
“We’re just trying to comply with the AG’s request,” Bella said in a text. “We have other issues in town to deal with, and we have other issues to spend money on. If he was going to file suit against us, if we don’t reply by the 15th deadline, then I’m really wasting Town resources that can and should be going to other places right now, and so it was my desire to just adhere to it and move on.”
Previously, the Town in a statement said it wasn’t outlawing the ICE centers but expressing its opinion as a body when it issued the resolution opposing them at its January 27 meeting. Unlike ordinances, which have the force of law, resolutions are used to express policy or issue the council’s opinion on a subject, the town said in a statement June 29 responding to a June 24 letter Rokita sent to the Town Council.
Additionally, the town can’t outlaw them even if they wanted to, Merrillville Town Attorney Joe Svetanoff previously told the Post-Tribune. If the Department of Homeland Security decides Merrillville is a preferred choice, there’s likely little the town can do to stop it because federal law would trump home rule in that instance, which is how Councilwoman Marge Uzelac, D-4, understood the situation.
“I don’t know what the reasoning is for this new resolution because I wasn’t here for the meeting (where it was brought forth), but I do know that if ICE comes, there’s nothing we can do about it,” Uzelac said Wednesday. “The (January 27) resolution was done for the people because they didn’t want it, and we didn’t want it either, so why they’re changing their minds is strange.”
Councilwoman Shauna Haynes Edwards, D-2, agreed.
“It’s crazy that all of a sudden, now they want to follow state statue, which I get, but we said ‘No,’ so why would you now change it because you don’t want to go against the grain?” Haynes Edwards said. “That’s what we do as council people: We do what’s best for our town, which is to not allow ICE detention centers in our area.”
Rokita, in a letter dated June 24, told the Merrillville Town Council that his office “has cause to believe that Merrillville has taken and continues to take actions to limit and restrict federal authorities’ ability to enforce federal immigration laws in violation of Indiana Code” because of the resolution. If it doesn’t, the Attorney General’s office “will undertake legal action to compel Merrillville’s compliance with state law,” he wrote.
“Since the Resolution was enacted, my office has received reports that indicate Merrillville has been making good on its promise to oppose and interfere with any attempt to create new federal immigration detention space within the Town. In particular, federal authorities have alerted my office of multiple instances in the past four months in which Merrillville officials have contacted individuals and entities involved in potential real estate transactions between ICE and Merrillville property owners to discourage the consummation of any transaction that could result in ICE acquiring real property within Merrillville,” Rokita wrote. “The Town’s actions have intimidated property owners, who reportedly fear reprisal from the Town, and resulted in the termination of multiple transactions through which ICE sought to acquire property for federal law enforcement purposes.”
“Any policy Merrillville implements, any resolution it enacts, and any other action it takes that have the purpose or effect of limiting or restricting federal immigration enforcement activities is therefore illegal under Indiana law … If you fail to provide a satisfactory response to this letter by July 15, 2026, I will exercise that authority and file suit against the Town of Merrillville.”
The town in its statement on the letter said the resolution is a First Amendment issue.
“We are frankly surprised by the letter from the Indiana Attorney General as well as the timing of it. The Town Council passed Resolution No. 26-02 six months ago,” the statement said. “The Attorney General’s letter also comes as Merrillville leaders are actively managing one of the largest disaster recovery efforts in the town’s history following the June 11 confirmed EF2 tornado, which destroyed more than 200 buildings in Merrillville and damaged more than 160 others.
“We hope that the Indiana Attorney General agrees with us that this expression of the opinion of the Town Council of Merrillville, not having the force of law, but expressing its sense on a matter of great public import, is consistent with the First Amendment of the United States Constitution, Article I, Sec. 9 of the Indiana Constitution and not at all violative of (Indiana Code).”
Michelle L. Quinn is a freelance reporter for the Post-Tribune.
