FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
July 5, 2016
CONTACT
Juan Gastelum, [email protected], 213-375-3149
NILC Opposes Bills Attacking Community-Policing Policies
WASHINGTON — The U.S. Senate is expected to vote tomorrow (Wednesday) on whether to consider two bills that, by attacking so-called sanctuary cities, where local police have adopted practices to encourage community safety for all residents, threaten to undo hard-won community-policing policies. One bill, S. 3100, sponsored by Sen. Pat Toomey (R-Pa.), would withhold federal funds for economic, social, and community development services from local governments with “sanctuary” jurisdictions. The other, known as Kate’s Law and sponsored by Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas), would impose additional mandatory minimum sentencing for undocumented immigrants charged with illegal reentry, at a cost of $2 billion to taxpayers.
The following is a statement from Marielena Hincapié, executive director of the National Immigration Law Center:
“Sen. Toomey’s proposal is an affront to communities that have fought to ensure that all residents, regardless of where they were born, feel safe in our communities and feel safe interacting with local police. It is an attempt to coerce cities into adopting policies that undermine public safety and should not be allowed to become law. Sen. Cruz’s bill should also be rejected. It would waste billions of taxpayer dollars and force a draconian, one-size-fits-all punishment at a time when criminal justice reform advocates from both sides of the aisle are calling for more, not less, discretion.
“The practical effect of further criminalizing immigrants and threatening to withhold funds designated for much-needed community and economic development programs is to pit vulnerable populations—especially people of color—against each other. We know that communities are safer when local governments and law enforcements officials don’t have to act as immigration agents. And it is simply unacceptable to hold hostage funds intended to help communities prosper.
“Senators should see past Toomey’s rhetoric and recognize tomorrow’s votes on the motions to proceed for what they are: an effort to exploit rising nativism to scapegoat immigrants. We are better than this, and the Senate should be, too. We fully expect those who believe in sound policy to vote ‘no’ tomorrow on the motions to proceed.”
# # #
CLINIC v. Rubio
This lawsuit challenges the Trump administration’s sweeping suspension of immigrant visa processing for people from 75 countries.
Last update: Sep 11, 2026
Benefits for Immigrant Survivors of Trafficking, Domestic Violence, and Other Serious Crimes in California
Updated Sep 2, 2026 This resource reviews the two categories of immigrants covered by California's SB 1569 (trafficking survivors and U visa applicants/holders), the benefits they may receive, and what they need to show in order to get these benefits. Originally...
Alerta Comunitaria: Viajar con un “permiso adelantado” conlleva ahora vetos de 3 y 10 años
Published Sep 2, 2026 El 13 de agosto de 2026, el tribunal de apelaciones de los Estados Unidos (la Junta de Apelaciones de Inmigración, o “BIA” por sus siglas en inglés) cambió las consecuencias de viajar con un “permiso adelantado.” Lee este recurso...
Amid Reports of Mass Visa ‘Pause,’ Groups File Emergency Motion to Enforce Court Order Striking Down 75-Country Visa Ban
Published Aug 26, 2026 Immigrant families, workers, and legal assistance groups harmed by the Trump administration’s 75-country ban on immigrant visas filed an emergency motion to enforce Friday’s court order and judgment in CLINIC v....