North Carolina lawmakers in Congress introduced legislation on Wednesday that would enable victims of felonies committed by undocumented immigrants to file lawsuits against cities, counties, and states that failed to comply with ICE deportation orders.
The bill, known as the “Justice for Victims of Sanctuary Cities Act,” is being sponsored by North Carolina Republican Senators Thom Tillis and Ted Budd, along with nine other GOP members in the Senate. In the House, Western North Carolina Republican Rep. Chuck Edwards, who previously introduced the legislation, has announced that he has reintroduced it.
According to a news release, Senator Tillis expressed his concerns about local jurisdictions in North Carolina and other parts of the country disregarding the lawful notification and detainer requests made by ICE agents. He emphasized that this practice puts innocent lives at risk when dangerous criminals are released back into their communities. Senator Tillis believes that it is imperative for Congress to take action and hold sanctuary cities accountable for their actions.
Sanctuary jurisdictions are known for implementing local protocols that limit or forbid cooperation with ICE. These protocols usually involve preventing law enforcement from adhering to ICE “detainers.” ICE issues these orders to hold undocumented immigrants in custody until the agency can take them into their own custody.
If the bill is enacted, it will hold jurisdictions accountable for not complying with ICE detainers or failing to notify the agency when releasing undocumented immigrants who later commit felonies. Under the proposed law, these jurisdictions could face civil liability for up to 10 years after the felony or the death caused by the felony.
According to Rick Su, a professor of immigration law at UNC, states must waive their “sovereign immunity” in order to be held accountable for federal civil lawsuits. Similarly, due to state sovereignty, jurisdictions cannot be charged with federal crimes for refusing to enforce ICE detainers, as these are merely requests rather than legal mandates.
The bill aims to circumvent sovereignty immunity by requiring recipients of various federal grant programs, which focus on economic, community, and housing development, to relinquish their legal immunity for “sanctuary-related civil action.” However, an exception is made for disaster relief grants intended for housing.
According to Su, this portion of the bill has the potential to face constitutional challenges. Federal courts have previously ruled that while requirements are acceptable, they should not be coercive in nature as they could infringe upon the Eleventh Amendment. This is evident in the Supreme Court’s decision to invalidate a provision in the Affordable Care Act, which mandated states to implement Medicaid expansion or risk losing all Medicaid funding.
According to Su, the authorities have a delicate balancing act to perform. On one hand, they need to make the offer attractive enough for most people to accept it willingly. On the other hand, they might want to avoid making it so generous that it falls into the trap of being seen as a coercive condition.
He refrained from making any predictions about whether the courts would deem these conditions coercive if the bill is passed into law. However, he acknowledged the substantial amount of funds allocated, which encompass a wide range of grants. These grants span from public works and research facilities to public housing for low-income families.
Under the proposed law, members of law enforcement are protected from legal liability when they comply with ICE detainers. This law also designates them as agents of the Department of Homeland Security. However, it should be noted that this protection does not apply to violations of civil or constitutional rights. Su points out that cities may face a difficult situation, as they could potentially be held liable if they fail to comply with detainers, but cooperating with ICE may leave them vulnerable to civil rights lawsuits.
According to a news release, Edwards stated his concerns about sanctuary cities and the need for accountability in ensuring the safety of Americans. He emphasized the importance of addressing the illegal immigrant crime crisis and holding these communities responsible for their policies. Edwards believes that the Justice for Victims of Sanctuary Cities Act will provide a solution by allowing victims to take legal action against counties, cities, or towns for the harmful and often illegal policies that directly resulted in their harm.
The bill arrives just as President Donald Trump is gearing up to fulfill his campaign promise of mass deportation for undocumented immigrants. However, Trump has encountered initial hurdles in his immigration agenda. Recently, a federal judge in Washington put a halt to his executive order aiming to revoke birthright citizenship in the U.S., a fundamental principle of immigration law protected by the Fourteenth Amendment.
The “Laken Riley Act” has also been recently passed, which expands the mandatory detention requirements for undocumented immigrants who have been arrested for petty crimes. The purpose of this bill is to further support the president’s deportation agenda. It is worth noting that the bill received bipartisan support, with 46 House Democrats and 12 Senate Democrats joining Republicans in its favor.
During his first term in office, Trump frequently clashed with sanctuary jurisdictions. He even went as far as signing an executive order to remove all federal funding from these jurisdictions due to their resistance against his administration’s immigration enforcement efforts. However, the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals deemed this action unconstitutional and struck it down.
During the Biden administration, conservative critics targeted these jurisdictions as they witnessed Republican governors Ron DeSantis of Florida and Greg Abbott of Texas transporting migrants to sanctuary cities in large numbers through the use of chartered buses and planes.
In November, North Carolina state lawmakers passed a legislation aimed at addressing sanctuary jurisdictions, despite then-Governor Roy Cooper’s veto. The bill, known as H.B. 10, mandates that sheriffs in the state must adhere to ICE detainers and provides them with protection from legal consequences when holding individuals suspected of being subject to detainers for a maximum of 48 hours.
