Providing for Consideration of H.R. 3009, Enforce the Law for Sanctuary Cities Act

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume, and I thank the gentleman from Georgia for yielding me the 30 minutes.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in opposition to the rule and the underlying bill. The rule here today provides for consideration of H.R. 3009, a bill that I strongly oppose that wouldn't even solve the problem that it attempts to here today.

First, a little bit about the process. This is a closed process that reflects the practice of shutting down debate on the House floor.

We should be talking about how to protect Americans like Kathryn Steinle. Instead, we are limited to debating a bill that, even if it had been the law, would not have affected this case or others like it or secured our borders. We are not even allowed to introduce amendments that would secure our borders here before the House floor.

We have not had a single hearing on this bill, and it has not been marked up in committee. It simply appeared before the Judiciary Committee.

It simply appeared before the Rules Committee yesterday fully formed. We talked for several hours about many of its flaws there. But, unfortunately, nevertheless, it has been advanced under this rule to the House floor.

This bill is not a fix. It is not a solution to anything. It is a heavy-handed way to attack communities that are simply trying to find solutions to what is fundamentally a Federal problem.

Yes, Mr. Speaker, dress it up however you like. It is our fault, the institution of Congress' fault, the Federal Government's fault, that we have failed to secure our borders.

It is the Federal Government's fault that there are 10-, 12-, 14 million people in our country illegally, some of them felon immigrants. That is not the fault of any city or county or State.

Our law enforcement professionals--sheriffs, police chiefs--are doing the best they can with the facts on the ground which work against them because of this body's failure to act.

This bill before us is simply an attempt to provide a false solution to a tragic incident, this in spite of the fact this body has refused to bring forward a single bill to fix our broken immigration system or secure our border.

The murder of Kathryn Steinle was a terrible tragedy. It should not have occurred. There were so many breakages along the way and things that could have been done to prevent it. But this action is primarily a way to highlight our broken immigration system.

It is a disgrace, for instance, that our immigration enforcement agencies dedicate significant resources to pursuing tens of thousands of individuals with no criminal history while the enforcement of our laws against serious felons like Mr. Lopez-Sanchez, as a result, is limited to something like a phone call or an email from the sheriff in San Francisco.

ICE, the agency with sole authority to pursue, detain, and deport people within our borders--an agency with a budget of more than $5 billion annually--is to blame here for its perverse allocation of resources.

Mr. Speaker, ICE should have pursued this individual vigorously, and ICE is responsible for the fact that this man was walking the streets of San Francisco instead of in Mexico; but, rather than take responsibility for this tragedy and commit to making the necessary changes to prevent anything like this from happening in the future--like, for instance, encapsulating the President's DACA and DAPA programs in statute so that our limited enforcement resources can be focused on criminal felons rather than tens of thousands of individuals with no criminal history--instead of doing that, this body is threatening local law enforcement with reducing their funds to keep communities safe.

Mr. Speaker, this bill before us would do even less to address this issue in a meaningful way. This legislation undermines local law enforcement, tramples the 10th Amendment to our Constitution, and directly undermines the authority and judgment exercised by local law enforcement agencies that are simply trying to do their job as best they can in light of a Federal failure--a Federal failure--to deport felon immigrants, a Federal failure to secure our borders, and a Federal failure to establish enforcement priorities in statute.

These decisions behind policing communities and ensuring public safety are made by those in those jurisdictions. We shouldn't have reactionary politicians in Washington threatening to cut off funding to sheriffs and police chiefs to make their communities less safe and lead to more victims of felons, both immigrant and American.

That is why this bill is opposed by the Conference of Mayors, Law Enforcement Immigration Task Force, the Fraternal Order of Police, and many other law enforcement professionals.

The fact is, Mr. Speaker, that article I, section 8 of the Constitution, which we began the session of Congress by reading, makes it clear that it is the Federal Government's responsibility to create and enforce immigration policy.

No matter how much this body tries to pass its failure on to cities, States, and counties, it will always come back here because only the Federal Government can secure our borders, only the Federal Government can establish enforcement priorities in statute, only the Federal Government can provide a pathway to citizenship, and only the Federal Government deports felon immigrants.

Despite this, however, Congress has displayed a complete and total unwillingness to even begin the debate on fixing our broken immigration system, instead choosing to threaten local law enforcement for our own failures in this town, Washington, D.C.

Mr. Speaker, I tried to reinitiate this debate just yesterday in the Rules Committee by introducing an amendment to this bill that would have allowed us to address the systemic problems by considering comprehensive immigration reform, including border security. Unfortunately, on a party-line vote, my measure was voted down and, therefore, in favor of maintaining this status quo.

Instead of having a meaningful debate on how to make our immigration system work in our favor and keep Americans safe by keeping immigrant felons off the street and securing our border, the Republicans are instead insisting to push this bill through the House, threatening local law enforcement without hearing, committee debate, or even the opportunity to amend it with good ideas from Democrats or Republicans.

Felons and egregious immigration violators like Mr. Lopez-Sanchez should not be free to walk the streets of this country, but until this body gets serious about securing our border and creating enforceable laws with the resources to enforce them, people like Mr. Lopez-Sanchez will walk free and will continue to harm Americans.

Mr. Speaker, this legislation will effectively require local enforcement of immigration laws, effectively trying to foist off our responsibilities on beleaguered local law enforcement agencies who, with their limited resources, are making the best judgments they can to keep their communities safe.

Federal courts have found that the DHS detainer policies violate the Constitution. Because ICE detainers request that a person be held in local custody for up to 2 days beyond the time they would otherwise be released, Federal courts have concluded that ICE detainers cause a new period of detention, and they are unconstitutional.

ICE has flouted this requirement for years, issuing detainers based on investigative interests alone; and these dragnet detainer issuances practices have caused the detention of countless people who were not criminal felons, felon aliens, who are not removable--even U.S. citizens in some cases.

The Federal courts finally caught up with this practice and found them to be unconstitutional and are holding local agencies under civil liability for honoring detainer requests from ICE.

In Colorado, for example, the Arapahoe County sheriff was forced to pay $30,000 to a victim of domestic violence who was, herself, arrested when she called the police for help. She was then held in the Arapahoe County jail at the request of Federal immigration authorities for 3 days after a judge had ordered her release. Another case in Jefferson County Sheriff's Office was forced to settle for $40,000.

Now, detainers are a form of communication and are therefore, in a reasonable reading of this proposed law, included. Effectively, you are presenting impossible choices to local law enforcement. You are telling them, on the one hand, subject yourself to civil liability or subject yourself to the cutting off of Federal grants to support your efforts.

Either way, Mr. Speaker, it is a loss for the safety of American citizens and a loss for law enforcement, all because this body fails to own up to the fact that only we can fix the problem; only we can secure the border; only we can replace our immigration system with a comprehensive approach that makes sense and has the resources to enforce it, the Federal resources to enforcement.

This isn't some theoretical matter that some intellectually curious law review cooked up. Jurisdictions in my district have been found civilly liable for enforcing detainers and been forced to pay. Lawsuits are being filed, and local law enforcement agencies that serve as proxies for ICE are losing.

If you want to tell cities in my State to enforce unconstitutional policies, why not take on the liability federally? Will this body pay the settlement from the Jefferson County Sheriff's Office? Will this body pay the settlement of $30,000 from the Arapahoe County sheriff?

The Republicans are making it clear that they don't have a plan to keep people like Kathryn Steinle safe. They don't have a plan to secure our borders. They don't have a plan to address our broken immigration system. This bill today is just another piece of evidence of this body's, this institution's failure to keep Americans safe.

Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source