Cutting Federal Funding to Sanctuary Cities (S. 2146)

What is S. 2146?

(Updated April 11, 2018)

This bill aims to hold sanctuary cities and jurisdictions accountable for defying federal immigration laws. It would increase penalties for those who illegally re-enter the U.S. after being deported.

Sanctuary jurisdictions are defined as states or localities that prohibit law enforcement officers from cooperating with federal immigration officials — even if they wish to do so. Under this bill, the Dept. of Homeland Security (DHS) would create a list of jurisdictions that meet this definition and make it publicly available.

Federal grant funding for law enforcement would be withheld from sanctuary jurisdictions, and made available to other states and localities that allow their law enforcement officers to cooperate with federal immigration officials.

Local law enforcement would explicitly have the legal authority to cooperate with federal immigration officials if they so choose — even in sanctuary jurisdictions. 

Kate's Law would also be included in this legislation. It is named for Kate Steinle, a woman who was murdered in a sanctuary city by an unauthorized immigrant who had been deported five times and had seven felony convictions. Kate’s Law establishes a mandatory minimum sentence of five years for unauthorized immigrants who are convicted of re-entering the U.S. after being convicted of an aggravated felony. The mandatory minimum also applies for those who had been convicted of illegally entering the U.S. twice before.

Argument in favor

Sanctuary cities encourage illegal immigration and endanger public safety — they don't deserve federal funding. Plus, mandatory minimums will help deter more illegal immigration.

Argument opposed

It's wrong to force immigration laws on communities that don't support them. This bill threatens to erode community trust in law enforcement as an overreactive response to an unfortunate event.

Impact

People who live in sanctuary jurisdictions, law enforcement agencies currently receiving federal funds in those states and localities, the Dept. of Justice, and the Dept. of Homeland Security.

Cost of S. 2146

A CBO cost estimate is unavailable.

Additional Info

In-Depth: Sponsoring Sen. David Vitter (R-LA) believes:

“There is absolutely no reason that any U.S. city should be allowed to ignore our nation’s immigration laws and provide a safe harbor for illegal immigrants. Our legislation will stop sending sanctuary cities federal taxpayer dollars, so hopefully they get a clue.”

The Obama administration has threatened to veto this legislation if it passes through Congress and arrives at his desk to be signed into law.

A Rasmussen poll released on July 10, 2015 found that 62 percent of Americans believe the Dept. of Justice (DOJ) should take legal action against sanctuary cities, while 58 percent believe federal funding should be cut off to those cities.

Currently this bill has 14 cosponsors in the Senate, all of whom are Republicans.

Of Note: Sanctuary cities in particular have long been controversial and grew in popularity during the 2000s — reaching a total of more than 200 cities or states with variations of the policy.

They re-emerged in the news cycle in July 2015 in San Francisco after Kate Steinle's  murder. San Francisco has been a sanctuary city since 1989, when an ordinance preventing local authorities from assisting federal immigration enforcement was passed. Learn more about the incident, the politics of the situation, and how immigration cases have been handled in San Francisco here.

The federal government has also expressed frustration with the sanctuary cities, as ICE officials are put in greater danger by having to apprehend the undocumented immigrants at their home than if they had been able to pick them up at the jail. Recently the agency has begun tracking the number of “detainer” requests they have sent to local authorities about immigrants they’ve arrest which are subsequently refused, and the subject of the request allowed to go free.

However, the Director of ICE has expressed skepticism that forcing sanctuary cities or states to cooperate with federal immigration enforcement would be helpful, calling it a “highly counterproductive step” that would “lead to more resistance and less cooperation.”

Media:

• Sponsoring Sen. David Vitter (R-LA) Press Release
• CNN
• The Hill
• San Jose Mercury News