No Bailout for Sanctuary Cities Act
1/30/2025, 10:53 AM
Status of Legislation
Purpose and Summary
No Bailout for Sanctuary Cities Act
This bill makes a state or political subdivision of a state ineligible for any federal funds that the jurisdiction intends to use to benefit non-U.S. nationals (i.e., aliens under federal law) who are unlawfully present if the jurisdiction withholds information about citizenship or immigration status or does not cooperate with immigration detainers.
Specifically, such funds are denied to any jurisdiction that has a law, policy, or practice that prohibits or restricts any government entity from
- maintaining, sending, or receiving information regarding the citizenship or immigration status of any individual;
- exchanging information regarding an individual's citizenship or immigration status with a federal, state, or local government entity;
- complying with a valid immigration detainer from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS); or
- notifying DHS about an individual's release from custody.
The funding restriction does not apply to a law, policy, or practice that only applies to an individual who comes forward as a victim of or a witness to a criminal offense.
DHS must annually provide to specified congressional committees a list of jurisdictions that have failed to comply with a DHS detainer or have failed to notify DHS of an individual’s release.
The funding restriction begins 60 days after the bill's enactment or on the first day of the fiscal year following the bill's enactment, whichever is earlier.
Under this bill, any sanctuary jurisdiction that offers benefits to undocumented immigrants would be ineligible to receive federal funds that are intended to benefit these individuals. This includes funding for programs such as healthcare, education, and housing.
Supporters of the bill argue that sanctuary jurisdictions should not be rewarded with federal funds if they are not fully cooperating with immigration enforcement efforts. They believe that providing benefits to undocumented immigrants encourages illegal immigration and undermines the rule of law. Opponents of the bill argue that it unfairly punishes immigrants and puts vulnerable populations at risk. They believe that sanctuary jurisdictions play an important role in protecting undocumented immigrants and fostering trust between immigrant communities and law enforcement. Overall, Bill 119 hr 32 is a controversial piece of legislation that highlights the ongoing debate over immigration policy in the United States. It will be important to closely monitor the progress of this bill as it moves through Congress.
Comments
Recent Activity
No Bailout for Sanctuary Cities Act
This bill makes a state or political subdivision of a state ineligible for any federal funds that the jurisdiction intends to use to benefit non-U.S. nationals (i.e., aliens under...
Specifically, such funds are denied to any jurisdiction that has a law, policy, or practice that prohibits or restricts any government entity from
- maintaining, sending, or receiving information regarding the citizenship or immigration status of any individual;
- exchanging information regarding an individual's citizenship or immigration status with a federal, state, or local government entity;
- complying with a valid immigration detainer from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS); or
- notifying DHS about an individual's release from custody.
The funding restriction does not apply to a law, policy, or practice that only applies to an individual who comes forward as a victim of or a witness to a criminal offense.
DHS must annually provide to specified congressional committees a list of jurisdictions that have failed to comply with a DHS detainer or have failed to notify DHS of an individual’s release.
The funding restriction begins 60 days after the bill's enactment or on the first day of the fiscal year following the bill's enactment, whichever is earlier.