H.R.3987 - No Community Development Block Grants for Sanctuary Cities Act (119th Congress)
Summary
H.R.3987, the "No Community Development Block Grants for Sanctuary Cities Act," aims to prohibit sanctuary jurisdictions from receiving Community Development Block Grants (CDBGs). The bill defines 'sanctuary jurisdiction' as any state or political subdivision that restricts its entities or officials from sharing information about individuals' citizenship or immigration status with federal, state, or local governments, or from complying with Department of Homeland Security detainer requests. An exception is provided for jurisdictions that protect victims or witnesses of crimes, ensuring they are not penalized for non-compliance in those specific cases.
Expected Effects
The immediate effect of this bill, if enacted, would be to make sanctuary jurisdictions ineligible for CDBGs. This could lead to a reduction in funding for community development projects in those areas. The longer-term effect could be a change in policies of sanctuary jurisdictions to comply with federal information-sharing requests to maintain eligibility for these grants.
Potential Benefits
- Potentially strengthens federal immigration enforcement by encouraging cooperation from state and local entities.
- May ensure that federal funds are not used in ways that could be perceived as obstructing federal law.
- Could lead to increased information sharing between local and federal authorities regarding individuals' immigration status.
- Might incentivize jurisdictions to re-evaluate their sanctuary policies.
- Could free up CDBG funds for other jurisdictions not deemed 'sanctuary cities'.
Potential Disadvantages
- Could negatively impact community development projects in sanctuary jurisdictions, affecting housing, infrastructure, and social services.
- May create a chilling effect, discouraging immigrants from reporting crimes or cooperating with local law enforcement due to fear of deportation.
- Could strain relationships between federal and local governments, leading to legal challenges and political tensions.
- The definition of 'sanctuary jurisdiction' could be interpreted broadly, potentially impacting jurisdictions with nuanced policies.
- May disproportionately affect communities with large immigrant populations.
Constitutional Alignment
The bill's constitutionality is debatable. Proponents might argue it aligns with the Necessary and Proper Clause (Article I, Section 8) by enabling the federal government to enforce immigration laws effectively. Opponents could argue it violates the Tenth Amendment by coercing states into enforcing federal law, potentially infringing on state sovereignty. Additionally, concerns could be raised regarding potential violations of the Fifth Amendment's due process clause if the definition of 'sanctuary jurisdiction' is applied in a discriminatory manner.
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).