Do Sanctuary Cities That Don't Cooperate With Immigration Officials Need to Lose Federal Funding? (S. 3100)
Do you support or oppose this bill?
What is S. 3100?
(Updated February 10, 2019)
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.
This legislation was introduced in conjunction with Kate's Law, which 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.
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. 3100
A CBO cost estimate is unavailable.
Additional Info
In-Depth: Sponsoring Sen. Pat Toomey (R-PA) introduced this bill to punish sanctuary cities for preventing their law enforcement officers from cooperating with federal immigration officials:
"It is past time to act. This Friday will mark one year since Kate Steinle was gunned down by a repeat felon who was in the country illegally, and she died in her father's arms. I cannot imagine the pain that Kate's father must feel. Sadly, the Steinle family is not alone. The Obama administration has confirmed that sanctuary cities result in thousands of criminals being put back on the streets."
The Obama administration threatened to veto an earlier version of this legislation if it were to pass through Congress and arrive 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.
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:
Summary by Eric Revell
(Photo Credit: By U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (Department of Homeland Security) - http://www.ice.gov/news/galleries/index.htm#tab_stories, Public Domain, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=20745328)
The Latest
-
🌎 Are You Ready To Take Action Against Climate Change?Scientists claim that last year "smashed" the record for the hottest year by a large margin , offering a "dramatic testimony" of read more... Environment
-
Should U.S. Implement a New Tax on AI to Fund Worker Benefits?The debate As technology advances, artificial intelligence (AI) becomes more integrated into our society. While leaders in AI read more... Artificial Intelligence
-
SCOTUS Hears Arguments of Abortion Pill Mifepristone CaseUpdated March 27, 2024, 12:30 p.m. EST On Tuesday, March 26, the Supreme Court heard arguments about the mifepristone case, read more... Women's Health
-
IT: ⛑️ It's American Red Cross Giving Day, and... How will you give back today?Welcome to Wednesday, March 27th, philanthropists and entrepreneurs... It's American Red Cross Giving Day - a time to ensure the read more...