House passes 2 bills on illegal immigration
‘Kate’s Law,’ ‘No Sanctuary for Criminals Act’ both approved
WASHINGTON — The Republican-led House made good Thursday on campaign promises from President Donald Trump to crack down on illegal immigration, passing two related crime bills mirroring efforts in Texas to punish so-called sanctuary cities.
The mostly party-line votes followed hours of emotional debate, reflecting the yawning partisan divide on immigrant rights and law enforcement. Opponents say their chances of blocking the legislation are better in the Senate.
One measure, called the “No Sanctuary for Criminals Act,” would bar certain law enforcement grants to cities that do not cooperate with federal immigration authorities, an attempt to give more legal heft to a Trump administration policy that has been tied up in the courts. It passed 228-195.
‘Kate’s Law’
The other, known widely as “Kate’s Law,” is named after Kate Steinle, a 32-year-old woman who was shot and killed in San Francisco two years ago by an immigrant in the country illegally who had passed through Texas and had been deported five times.
That bill, which passed 257-167, would enhance penalties for convicted criminals who are deported and return to the United States illegally.
For immigration hardliners, Steinle has become the face of victims of crimes committed by immigrants in the country illegally, an issue President Donald Trump highlighted Wednesday in a White House event with victims’ families.
An earlier version of Kate’s Law, championed by ex-Fox News host Bill O’Reilly, was introduced in 2015. It was not acted on, but a similar bill targeting sanctuary cities did pass the House that year, but not the Senate, where it was filibustered by Democrats.
Opposition to rhetoric
In the push to win final House passage Thursday, House Speaker Paul Ryan said of Steinle’s killer, Francisco Sanchez, “He should not have been here, and she should not have died.”
Democrats and immigrant-rights activists say the measure demonizes immigrants, who they say are no more likely to commit crime than native-born citizens.
In a speech Thursday on the House floor, San Antonio Democrat Lloyd Doggett argued putting local police into the service of immigration authorities would undermine public safety, eroding community trust.
“The only sanctuary involved here today is the sanctuary that this sorry bill provides for prejudice,” Doggett said. “This is the Trump counterpart to the outrageous Senate Bill 4 that Governor Greg Abbott has been promoting in Texas. It all goes back to the rhetoric last year about the ‘bad hombres’ and the attacks on Mexico and Mexicans. I want the ‘bad hombres’ off the street no matter where they come from.”
Senate Bill 4, a state sanctuary cities ban that was pushed through the Texas Legislature this year, would allow local police to question legally detained criminal suspects about their immigration status. It would also punish law enforcement officials who don’t cooperate with federal immigration authorities.
The state law, derided by Democrats as an unconstitutional “show me your papers” measure, is under challenge before U.S. District Judge Orlando Garcia in San Antonio.
‘Criminal actions’ focus
Democrats say the congressional measures would be counter-productive as well.
“Our local law enforcement officers for Houston PD and Harris County Sheriffs are responsible for protecting the people of our great city and upholding our local laws,” said Houston Democrat Gene Green, whose district is more than 70 percent Hispanic. “They are not, nor should they become, de facto federal immigration agents. The U.S. Constitution is clear that immigration enforcement is the responsibility of the federal government, and not the states or local governments.”
Houston-area Republicans rallied around the House bills. “These two bills are rooted in common sense, and focus on criminal actions,” said Friendswood Republican Randy Weber. “Convicted illegal aliens have no business being on our streets.”
Among the most ardent congressional proponents of cutting off funds to sanctuary cities is Houston Republican John Culberson, a top House appropriator who has asserted the right of Congress over spending matters. But despite his claims to have cut off law enforcement grants to sanctuary cities a year ago, the issue remains on hold in federal courts.
Attorneys for the states of California and Connecticut, two of Culberson’s top targets, say their policies do not block local police and jailers from sharing immigration information with federal authorities, as required by a 1996 law.
Legal issue
The legal issue comes down to whether the law requires them to hold suspects targeted for deportation past their court-ordered release dates. Some courts have held that the Immigration and Customs Enforcement “detainers” are voluntary civil procedures. Many civil liberties groups say holding people in jail without active criminal warrants is unconstitutional.
But Steinle’s death galvanized immigration hard-liners in Republican ranks who argue it could have been prevented. In all, 24 Democrats also voted for Kate’s Law, including Henry Cuellar of Laredo. He also was one of three Democrats to vote for the sanctuary cities law.
“In addition to Kate’s shooter being a criminal alien, he was also released by local authorities despite his ICE detainer because he was in a ‘sanctuary city,’” said Texas Republican Michael McCaul, chairman of the Homeland Security Committee. “We are a nation of laws, laws that are established to keep Americans safe, and individuals in defiance of those laws must be held responsible.”