Should the District of Columbia be mandated to cooperate with federal immigration enforcement actions?
H.R. 2056 prohibits Washington, DC from enacting statutes, ordinances, policies, or practices that help protect immigrants by blocking federal immigration law enforcement action. Under this bill, the District of Columbia would be mandated to exchange information regarding resident citizenship or immigration status with the federal government to carry out detention and other enforcement procedures. Although there is an exception made for victims or witnesses to criminal offenses, the bill intends to remove barriers to federal immigration enforcement action against residents of Washington, DC.
Sponsor: Rep. Clay Higgins (Republican, Louisiana, District 3)
View full bill text ➔
How do you feel?
Opponents say
• "Sanctuary policies do not violate or conflict with federal law. While there is no set, legal definition of what constitutes a ‘sanctuary policy,’ in general, such policies limit the circumstances under which state and local governments and law enforcement agencies will use their resources to cooperate with federal immigration enforcement efforts. States and local governments and law enforcement agencies undertake such policies so as to better serve their communities. Such policies make clear to noncitizens that they have nothing to fear from cooperating with the local law enforcement agency or with state and local government officials. Such policies also allow state and local officials to make the decisions about how to best use limited law enforcement and government resources. This allows law enforcement and government officials to more effectively police and provide services to all residents of their communities." Source: National Immigration Project
• "Constitutional protection for sanctuary jurisdictions rests on a series of Supreme Court decisions holding that the 10th Amendment — which states that ‘powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States . . . or to the people’ — bans federal ‘commandeering’ of state governments. The leading decisions to that effect are New York v. United States (1992) and Printz v. United States (1997). They hold, among other things, that state and local governments cannot be compelled to help enforce federal law. The anti-commandeering doctrine was further extended in Murphy v. NCAA (2018), which held that the federal government cannot issue orders to state legislatures and thereby force states to enact legislation or to refrain from repealing state laws." Source: Ilya Somin, Professor of Law at George Mason University
• "An individual, documented or undocumented, should know that when they call the police, we’re going to come there and we’re going to help them... We’re going to help them jump start their car, we’re going to help them if they’re a victim of domestic violence, if they’re robbed… Hopefully we’ll never get into, ‘Hey, what’s your legal status?’ Let’s say someone’s being abused by their spouse. We would not want them to fear calling us because we might deport them. We want there to always be trust." Source: Brian Steel, President of Fraternal Order of Police Capital City Lodge No. 9
Proponents say
• "Sanctuary policies have devastating real-life consequences. As our nation’s capital, Washington D.C. should be the safest, most ‘America First’ city in the United States, and Congress has the Constitutional authority to end the city’s sanctuary status. My bill is a small step towards returning Washington DC to We, the People." Source: Rep. Clay Higgins (Republican, Louisiana, District 3)
• "Across the country, woke Democrat politicians have put in place “sanctuary” policies for their cities, preventing compliance with federal immigration law and threatening the safety of the American citizens in their jurisdictions. One of these cities includes Washington, D.C., our nation’s capital… This is unacceptable. Federal immigration law is in place for a reason: to defend the safety of our nation and the American people. It’s past time we hold cities in defiance of federal law accountable, especially the city where our federal government is based and that belongs to all Americans. House Republicans are bringing forward legislation to strip D.C. of its sanctuary policies and reinstate the rule of law in our nation’s capital… H.R. 2056, the District of Columbia Federal Immigration Compliance Act, introduced by Rep. Clay Higgins, puts an end to the D.C. Council’s sanctuary policies blocking D.C. employees from providing an individual’s immigration status and enforces compliance with lawful DHS or Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) detainer requests. Americans should be able to visit our nation’s capital without fearing for their safety – House Republicans are restoring the rule of law in Washington, D.C., by ensuring illegal immigrants are held accountable and the city complies with federal immigration law." Source: Rep. Steve Scalise (Republican, Louisiana, District 1), House Majority Leader
• "The United States Citizenship and Immigration Services ended coordination on naturalization ceremonies with sanctuary cities that restrict the ability of law enforcement to cooperate with DHS – in defiance of the rule of law – to enforce immigration laws and keep American communities safe from illegal and violent aliens." Source: Matthew Tragesser, Spokesperson for United States Citizenship and Immigration Services
