No Bailout for Sanctuary Cities Act
- Sponsor
- Sen. Risch, James E. [R-ID]
- Committees
- Judiciary Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Feb 25, 2025
Bottom line
This bill aims to penalize state and local governments that limit cooperation with federal immigration enforcement by cutting off federal funds used to support undocumented immigrants.
What it actually does
This bill defines 'sanctuary jurisdiction' as any state or local government that restricts cooperation with federal immigration enforcement, including information sharing or compliance with detainer requests. It then makes such jurisdictions ineligible to receive federal funds intended for the benefit of undocumented aliens, encompassing services like food, shelter, healthcare, legal aid, and transportation. The bill also mandates an annual report from the Secretary of Homeland Security identifying non-compliant jurisdictions.
Proponents argue
Supporters argue the bill discourages policies that undermine federal immigration law and incentivize illegal immigration, ensuring federal taxpayer money is not used to support individuals who have violated immigration laws. They contend it upholds the rule of law and encourages jurisdictions to cooperate with federal authorities to enhance national security and immigration enforcement.
Opponents contend
Opponents would likely argue that the bill punishes vulnerable populations by cutting off essential services, potentially leading to humanitarian crises and public health issues. They might also contend it infringes on states' rights to set their own policies, could lead to increased racial profiling, and erodes trust between immigrant communities and local law enforcement, thereby undermining overall public safety.
The bill is very short and can be read quickly, allowing ample time for a thorough evaluation of its implications.
Section 1
Short Title
This section establishes the official short title of the Act as the 'No Bailout for Sanctuary Cities Act,' providing a concise and publicly recognizable name for the legislation.
Supporters argue
Supporters would argue that a clear and direct short title helps communicate the bill's purpose to the public and policymakers, immediately conveying its intent.
Critics contend
Opponents might criticize the short title as politically charged and misleading, framing the issue in a way that prejudges the debate and aims to evoke a specific emotional response.
Tradeoffs
The choice of a short title involves balancing clarity and political messaging, often reflecting the bill's core advocacy position.
Section 2
Defining 'Sanctuary Jurisdiction'
This section defines a 'sanctuary jurisdiction' as any state or local government that prohibits or restricts its entities or officials from sharing immigration status information with federal authorities or from complying with lawful requests from the Secretary of Homeland Security for detainers or release notifications. It includes an exception for policies protecting victims or witnesses of criminal offenses.
Section 3
Withholding Federal Funds from Sanctuary Jurisdictions
This section makes any jurisdiction identified as a 'sanctuary jurisdiction' ineligible to receive federal funds that it intends to use for the benefit of undocumented aliens. This includes funds for food, shelter, healthcare, legal services, and transportation, with the ineligibility beginning 60 days after enactment or the start of the next fiscal year, whichever is earlier.
Section 4
Annual Report on Non-Compliant Jurisdictions
This section requires the Secretary of Homeland Security to submit an annual report to the Senate and House Judiciary Committees. The report must identify any state or political subdivision that has failed to comply with a lawful detainer or release notification request from DHS within the preceding year, as defined in Section 2(a)(2).