Anti-Sanctuary Bills Filed Across the Country

By David Jaroslav | January 31, 2019

As state legislatures began convening for their 2019 sessions, December and January saw bills filed in numerous states to prohibit dangerous sanctuary policies. What each bill does, and what its chances are, varies considerably.

Connecticut

• Senate Bill (SB) 650, sponsored by Senator Rob Sampson (R-Wolcott) and House Bill (HB) 6329, sponsored by Representative John Fusco (R-Southington) would:
  • Ban sanctuary policies by local governments and also state agencies such as public universities
  • Don’t specifically mention immigration detainers

Democrats control both chambers and new Governor Ned Lamont (D) supports sanctuary policies, so these bills are unlikely to get far, but committee hearings could still draw attention to the issue.

Florida

• SB 168 by Sen. Joe Gruters (R-Sarasota), and HB 527 by Rep. Cord Byrd (R-Jacksonville Beach), would:
  • Ban sanctuary policies by both local governments and state agencies
  • Specifically require compliance with immigration detainers
  • Allow victims or their representatives to sue for injury or death caused by sanctuary policies

New Governor Ron DeSantis (R) made immigration enforcement, and specifically eliminating sanctuary cities, a major priority in his election campaign, so there’s a good chance this is the year an anti-sanctuary bill becomes law in the Sunshine State.

Kentucky

• HB 38 by Rep. Lynn Bechler (R-Marion) would:
  • Ban sanctuary policies by local governments and the Kentucky State Police, but doesn’t cover other state agencies
  • Doesn’t mention detainers
  • Also bans in-state tuition for illegal aliens

Republican Governor Matt Bevin campaigned to “demand that effective enforcement measures are implemented and the magnets that attract illegal immigrants are eliminated … [and for] allowing states like Kentucky to enforce federal immigration laws].” If this bill passes, he would likely sign it.

Michigan

• HB 4083 by Rep. Pamela Hornberger (R-Chesterfield) and HB 4090 by Rep. Beau FaFave (R-Iron Mountain) would:
  • Ban sanctuary policies by all local governments, 4090 by counties only, neither covers state agencies
  • Doesn’t mention detainers

Republicans control both chambers, but new Governor Gretchen Whitmer (D) has supported sanctuary policies, so she would be likely to veto these bills.

Minnesota

• Senate File (SF) 80 by Sen. Paul Utke (R-Park Rapids) and House File (HF) 117 by Rep. Matt Grossell (R-Clearbrook) would:
  • Ban sanctuary policies by cities but not by other local governments or state agencies
  • Doesn’t mention detainers

Party control of the legislature is split, so progress looks positive in the Republican-majority Senate but far less probable in the Democrat-run House. If a bill would happen to pass, new Governor Tim Walz (D), who has campaigned for and supported sanctuary policies, would almost certainly veto it.

Missouri

• SB 64 by Sen. Eric Burlison (R-Springfield) would:
  • Strengthen an earlier ban on sanctuary policies by local governments, doesn’t cover state agencies
  • Require compliance with detainers

Governor Mike Parson (R) has supported President Trump’s enforcement agenda on immigration, including sending National Guard troops to the border. If this bill passed he would likely sign it.

Montana

• HB 146 and HB 147, both by Rep. Kenneth Holmlund (R-Miles City) would:
  • Ban sanctuary policies by both local governments and state agencies
  • Require compliance with detainers

146 would go into effect immediately while 147 would go before the voters as a referendum. Governor Steve Bullock (D) vetoed a similar bill in 2013 and likely would again.

New Hampshire

• SB 317 by Sen. Bob Giuda (R-Warren) would:
  • Ban sanctuary policies by both local governments and state agencies
  • Require compliance with detainers

Democrats control both chambers of the Granite State’s legislature, so these bills are unlikely to pass this year, but they may set the stage for a future session when Republicans have majorities again. Party control in New Hampshire is historically close and changes frequently. If a bill passes, Governor Chris Sununu (R) would probably sign it.

South Dakota

• HB 1172 by Rep. Kevin Jensen (R-Canton) would:
  • Ban sanctuary policies by both local governments but not state agencies
  • Doesn’t mention detainers

New Governor Kristi Noem (R) has spoken out against sanctuary policies and supported federal legislation against them when she was in Congress, so she would almost certainly sign this bill.

Virginia

• SB 1156 by Sen. Dick Black (R-Ashburn) would:
  • Ban sanctuary policies by local governments, doesn’t cover state agencies
  • Doesn’t mention detainers

Both chambers passed an identical bill last year that was vetoed by Gov. Ralph Northam (D), so the same can be anticipated this year.

West Virginia

• HB 2067 by Rep. Ray Hollen (R-Elizabeth) would:
  • Ban sanctuary policies by local governments, doesn’t cover state agencies
  • Doesn’t mention detainers

Governor Jim Justice (R) generally supports President Trump’s agenda and has said “Democrats need to grow up and stop acting ‘ridiculous’” on immigration, but he only recently switched parties himself and does not appear to have taken a public position either way on sanctuary policies.

Wyoming

• HB 151 by Rep. Chuck Gray (R-Casper) would:
  • Ban sanctuary policies by local governments, doesn’t cover state agencies
  • Doesn’t mention detainers

Governor Mark Gordon (R) defeated vocal sanctuary opponent Foster Friess in the 2018 GOP gubernatorial primary and does not appear to have taken a public position on the issue himself, so his support or opposition is unclear.

Even more anti-sanctuary bills are likely in other states over the next few months.