H.R.3881 - Stop Dangerous Sanctuary Cities Act (119th Congress)
Summary
H.R. 3881, the "Stop Dangerous Sanctuary Cities Act," aims to ensure cooperation between state and local law enforcement and federal officials regarding individuals illegally present in the United States. It defines "sanctuary jurisdictions" as those that restrict information sharing or compliance with federal detainers. The bill also proposes to make sanctuary jurisdictions ineligible for certain federal funds, specifically Economic Development Administration grants and Community Development Block Grants.
The bill seeks to grant state and local law enforcement officers acting in compliance with federal detainers the same authority and protections as federal officers. This includes deeming them federal employees for liability purposes in legal proceedings.
Ultimately, the bill intends to incentivize state and local entities to cooperate with federal immigration enforcement efforts by attaching financial consequences to non-compliance.
Expected Effects
The likely effect of this bill, if enacted, would be increased cooperation between state/local law enforcement and federal immigration authorities. This could lead to more arrests and deportations of individuals unlawfully present in the U.S.
Sanctuary jurisdictions may face significant financial losses due to ineligibility for federal grants. This could force them to change their policies to regain access to these funds.
There could be an increase in legal challenges related to immigration enforcement, particularly concerning the scope of authority granted to state and local officers and potential civil rights violations.
Potential Benefits
- Enhanced public safety by facilitating the removal of dangerous criminals who are illegally present in the U.S.
- Increased cooperation between different levels of law enforcement, leading to more effective immigration enforcement.
- Potential reduction in crime rates in communities that were previously considered "sanctuaries."
- Financial incentives for states and localities to comply with federal immigration laws.
- Clarification of legal liabilities for state and local officers acting under federal detainers.
Most Benefited Areas:
Potential Disadvantages
- Potential for increased racial profiling and discrimination by state and local law enforcement.
- Erosion of trust between immigrant communities and local law enforcement, making it harder to solve crimes.
- Financial strain on sanctuary jurisdictions due to loss of federal funding, potentially impacting essential services.
- Increased risk of civil rights violations due to expanded authority granted to state and local officers.
- Possible legal challenges based on the 10th Amendment and federal overreach into state and local affairs.
Constitutional Alignment
The bill's constitutionality is debatable. Proponents might argue it aligns with the federal government's power to regulate immigration and ensure national security (Article I, Section 8). They may also cite the Necessary and Proper Clause to justify incentivizing state cooperation.
Opponents could argue that the bill infringes on states' rights under the 10th Amendment by coercing them into enforcing federal law. Concerns about potential violations of individual rights (4th and 5th Amendments) due to expanded detainer authority could also arise.
The bill includes a rule of construction stating that nothing in the section may be construed to provide immunity to any person who knowingly violates the civil or constitutional rights of an individual.
Impact Assessment: Things You Care About ⓘ
This action has been evaluated across 19 key areas that matter to you. Scores range from 1 (highly disadvantageous) to 5 (highly beneficial).