Latest action: Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
Referred to one or more standing committees for review, hearings, and possible markup.
Specific committees not parsed from action data.
The committee may hold hearings, amend the bill, or let it die without action.
Next: Reported
Full chamber floor — Speaker / Majority Leader controls scheduling
Bill aims to hold sanctuary cities accountable for not cooperating with federal immigration enforcement.
The problem
Some cities limit cooperation with federal immigration authorities. Supporters argue this creates public safety risks and undermines immigration law enforcement nationwide.
The proposal
Bill establishes consequences for cities that refuse to comply with federal immigration detention requests and cooperation with immigration authorities.
The impact
Local law enforcement, city governments, and immigrant communities. Could affect how police interact with federal agencies and immigration enforcement operations.
Supporters argue consistent enforcement across all jurisdictions strengthens immigration law. They contend local variation creates confusion and undermines federal policy.
Proponents claim better information-sharing between local and federal authorities helps identify serious criminals. They argue sanctuary policies prevent removal of dangerous offenders.
Supporters believe cities should not ignore federal law using local funds and policies. They argue federal law should take priority in immigration matters.
Backers contend uniform application of federal law strengthens democratic governance. They argue cities cannot pick which laws to enforce.
Critics worry forcing police cooperation on immigration damages community trust. Immigrants may avoid reporting crimes or helping police if fearful of deportation.
Opponents argue states and cities have rights to set enforcement priorities. They question whether federal government can force local participation this way.
Critics contend compliance imposes unfunded federal mandates on cash-strapped cities. Local budgets would bear costs for federal enforcement priorities.
Opponents worry increased enforcement separates families and harms vulnerable populations. They argue this disproportionately affects legal immigrants and citizen family members.
Generated by AI from the bill text. Not a prediction and not legal or policy advice. The percentage is the model's own rating of each item — self-reported, and not a measure of how accurate it is.
Loading map…
Loading...
0 citizens have already voted
Free · No spam · See how your representatives voted
Be the first to weigh in
Your vote starts the conversation
How citizen engagement works
Citizens vote & comment
Public opinion data is aggregated and updated in real time.
Patterns become visible
Representatives can see constituent sentiment broken down by district.
Your voice on the record
Contact your rep directly — one constituent call can shift a staffer's priority list.
Research shows that constituent contacts — especially calls — are among the most effective ways to influence a legislator's position on active bills.
Other bills in this policy area
HR 10740
To designate Ukraine under section 244 of the Immigration and Nationality Act to provide certain nationals of Ukraine with continued eligibility for temporary protected status, and for other purposes.
HR 10656
Nicholas Douglas Quets Border Travel Safety Act
S 5521
Ukrainian Adjustment Act of 2026
S 5490
A bill to designate Ukraine under section 244 of the Immigration and Nationality Act to provide certain nationals of Ukraine with continued eligibility for temporary protected status, and for other purposes.
Individual contributions, grouped by employer · FEC
Where their individual donors work · 2026 cycle
Money from people who work there, not from the company. Not tied to this bill.
Itemized individual contributions via FEC, grouped by the employer each contributor self-reported. Companies and unions cannot contribute to federal candidates from their treasuries, so these totals are money from people who work at an employer — never from the organization itself. They are campaign contributions covering a full election cycle and are not connected to this bill.
Senate LDA lobbying disclosures
Couldn't load lobbying disclosures right now.