Stop Dangerous Sanctuary Cities Act
- Bill Number
- S. 685
- Origin Chamber
- Senate
- Congress
- 119th Congress, Session 1
- Policy Area
- Immigration
- Status
- Introduced
- Latest Action
- 2025-02-24: Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
- Last Updated
- 2025-12-05T21:31:34Z
AI-Generated Summary
Purpose
The "Stop Dangerous Sanctuary Cities Act" (S. 685) aims to promote cooperation between state and local law enforcement and federal immigration authorities. It seeks to protect U.S. communities from violent criminals and suspected terrorists who are illegally present by encouraging compliance with federal immigration detainers and penalizing non-compliant "sanctuary jurisdictions" through the withholding of certain federal grants.
Key Provisions
- Cooperation with Federal Detainers (Section 2):
- State or local governments, and their officers or employees, that comply with a detainer (a formal request by the Department of Homeland Security, or DHS, to hold an individual for up to 48 hours for immigration processing) issued under the Immigration and Nationality Act are treated as agents of DHS.
- These entities gain the same legal authority as DHS officers for actions related to the detainer.
- In lawsuits challenging such detentions, the state or local entity is immune from liability; individual officers are considered federal employees acting within their job scope, making the U.S. government the defendant under the Federal Tort Claims Act (a law allowing certain lawsuits against the federal government for negligence).
- No protection is provided for anyone who intentionally violates a person's civil or constitutional rights.
- Definition of Sanctuary Jurisdiction (Section 3):
- A "sanctuary jurisdiction" is any state or local government with laws, policies, or practices that limit sharing information about an individual's citizenship or immigration status with federal, state, or local authorities, or that prevent compliance with DHS detainer requests.
- Exception: Jurisdictions are not considered "sanctuary" if their policy only applies to individuals who come forward as victims or witnesses in criminal cases.
- Withholding of Federal Funds (Section 4):
- Sanctuary jurisdictions become ineligible for specific federal grants starting October 1, 2025, including:
- Economic Development Administration grants for public works, planning, supplementary funding, training, research, and technical assistance (amending the Public Works and Economic Development Act of 1965).
- Community Development Block Grants for housing and community projects (amending the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974).
- Funds allocated to sanctuary jurisdictions must be returned and reallocated to non-sanctuary areas using adjusted formulas that exclude sanctuary entities.
Significant Changes to Existing Law
- Amends the Public Works and Economic Development Act of 1965 to add eligibility criteria excluding sanctuary jurisdictions from grants for economic development projects, planning, and technical assistance.
- Modifies the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 to define "sanctuary jurisdiction," require grantees to certify non-sanctuary status, and mandate return/reallocation of funds if a jurisdiction becomes a sanctuary during the grant period.
- Introduces federal liability protections and authority extensions for state/local compliance with immigration detainers, which were not previously codified in this manner.
Potential Impacts
- On Government Agencies: Enhances DHS's ability to enforce immigration laws through increased state and local cooperation, potentially reducing administrative burdens but increasing legal risks if rights violations occur. State and local agencies in sanctuary areas may face budget shortfalls from lost grants, affecting economic and community development programs.
- On Citizens: Could improve public safety in communities by facilitating the removal of certain undocumented individuals suspected of crimes or terrorism. However, it may deter immigrant communities (including legal residents) from reporting crimes due to fears of immigration enforcement, and reduce local funding for housing, infrastructure, and anti-poverty initiatives.
- On International Relations: Minimal direct impact, though it may indirectly affect diplomatic ties with countries of origin for affected individuals by increasing deportations of their nationals.
Main Stakeholders Affected
- State and Local Governments: Particularly "sanctuary" cities or states (e.g., those with policies limiting immigration enforcement cooperation), which risk losing federal funding.
- Law Enforcement Officers: Gain federal protections and authority when complying with detainers but face personal risks if actions violate rights.
- Department of Homeland Security and Federal Officials: Benefit from broader enforcement support.
- Undocumented Immigrants: Especially those suspected of crimes or terrorism, facing higher detention and deportation risks; also affects victims/witnesses in non-sanctuary exceptions.
- U.S. Citizens and Communities: Protected from targeted threats but potentially impacted by reduced local services in sanctuary areas.
Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications
- Legal: May face court challenges over federal preemption of state policies (under the Supremacy Clause, which makes federal law supreme) and enforcement of detainers, building on prior cases like Arizona v. United States (2012), which limited state immigration roles.
- Constitutional: Raises concerns under the Tenth Amendment (reserving powers to states) regarding federal funding conditions as "coercion," and potential due process issues (Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments) if detentions lead to rights violations without adequate safeguards.
- Political: Likely to intensify debates on immigration enforcement, federalism, and public safety, with supporters viewing it as strengthening national security and critics seeing it as punitive toward diverse urban areas.
This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.
Sponsor
Cosponsors (17)
Sen. Sheehy, Tim [R-MT], Sen. Johnson, Ron [R-WI], Sen. Lankford, James [R-OK], Sen. Budd, Ted [R-NC], Sen. Grassley, Chuck [R-IA], Sen. Ricketts, Pete [R-NE], Sen. Scott, Rick [R-FL], Sen. Capito, Shelley Moore [R-WV], Sen. Cramer, Kevin [R-ND], Sen. Fischer, Deb [R-NE], Sen. Hagerty, Bill [R-TN], Sen. Hoeven, John [R-ND], Sen. Hyde-Smith, Cindy [R-MS], Sen. Banks, Jim [R-IN], Sen. Schmitt, Eric [R-MO], Sen. Moreno, Bernie [R-OH], Sen. Britt, Katie Boyd [R-AL]
Recent Actions
- 2025-02-24: Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
- 2025-02-24: Introduced in Senate
Bill Versions
- Stop Dangerous Sanctuary Cities Act — issued 2025-02-24 — PDF (9 pages)