- No clear beneficiaries surfaced yet.
No Bailout for Sanctuary Cities Act
Referred to the House Committee on the Judiciary.
<p><strong>No Bailout for Sanctuary Cities Act</strong></p><p>This bill makes a state or political subdivision of a state ineligible for any federal funds that the jurisdiction intends to use to benefit non-U.S. nationals (i.e., <em>aliens </em>under federal law) who are unlawfully present if the jurisdiction withholds information about citizenship or immigration status or does not cooperate with immigration detainers.</p><p>Specifically, such funds are denied to any jurisdiction that has a law, policy, or practice that prohibits or restricts any government entity from</p><ul><li>maintaining, sending, or receiving information regarding the citizenship or immigration status of any individual;</li><li>exchanging information regarding an individual's citizenship or immigration status with a federal, state, or local government entity; </li><li>complying with a valid immigration detainer from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS); or </li><li>notifying DHS about an individual's release from custody.</li></ul><p>The funding restriction does not apply to a law, policy, or practice that only applies to an individual who comes forward as a victim of or a witness to a criminal offense.</p><p>DHS must annually provide to specified congressional committees a list of jurisdictions that have failed to comply with a DHS detainer or have failed to notify DHS of an individual’s release.</p><p>The funding restriction begins 60 days after the bill's enactment or on the first day of the fiscal year following the bill's enactment, whichever is earlier.</p>
The main political fault lines are not fully surfaced yet, so coalition durability is still unclear.
The next hurdle is converting committee movement into a floor coalition.
<p><strong>No Bailout for Sanctuary Cities Act</strong></p><p>This bill makes a state or political subdivision of a state ineligible for any federal funds that the jurisdiction intends to use to benefit non-U.S. nationals (i.e., <em>aliens </em>under federal law) who are unlawfully present if the jurisdiction withholds information about citizenship or immigration status or does not cooperate with immigration detainers.</p><p>Specifically, such funds are denied to any jurisdiction that has a law, policy, or practice that prohibits or restricts any government entity from</p><ul><li>maintaining, sending, or receiving information regarding the citizenship or immigration status of any individual;</li><li>exchanging information regarding an individual's citizenship or immigration status with a federal, state, or local government entity; </li><li>complying with a valid immigration detainer from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS); or </li><li>notifying DHS about an individual's release from custody.</li></ul><p>The funding restriction does not apply to a law, policy, or practice that only applies to an individual who comes forward as a victim of or a witness to a criminal offense.</p><p>DHS must annually provide to specified congressional committees a list of jurisdictions that have failed to comply with a DHS detainer or have failed to notify DHS of an individual’s release.</p><p>The funding restriction begins 60 days after the bill's enactment or on the first day of the fiscal year following the bill's enactment, whichever is earlier.</p>
This bill has moved beyond introduction, but committee and floor dynamics still determine whether it can build durable support.
How solid the drafting looks.
The main political fault lines are not fully surfaced yet, so coalition durability is still unclear.
Who stands to gain, and who may push back.
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
- No clear downsides surfaced yet.
Why the argument around this bill splits.
The main political fault lines are not fully surfaced yet, so coalition durability is still unclear.
The main political fault lines are not fully surfaced yet, so coalition durability is still unclear.
The main political fault lines are not fully surfaced yet, so coalition durability is still unclear.
The main political fault lines are not fully surfaced yet, so coalition durability is still unclear.
The path through Congress.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
This bill has moved beyond introduction, but committee and floor dynamics still determine whether it can build durable support.
- The next hurdle is converting committee movement into a floor coalition.
Recent votes on the bill.
No vote history yet
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Go deeper than the headline read.
The main political fault lines are not fully surfaced yet, so coalition durability is still unclear.
This bill has moved beyond introduction, but committee and floor dynamics still determine whether it can build durable support.
Pro readers get the full perspective split, passage barriers, legislative design review, stakeholder impact map, and lens-based policy tradeoff analysis for No Bailout for Sanctuary Cities Act.
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.