In an effort to keep the immigration conversation centered on Republicans, Democrats have recently tried to stay away from high-profile battles over undocumented immigrants.
But with a bill to defund “sanctuary cities” coming to the floor, Democrats are putting together a formal whip operation to oppose the GOP legislation.
It’s a different posturing than their attitude toward the Laken Riley Act, the first bill Congress passed this year. And it’s a different effort from their response to a Republican-led measure that passed the House in January that would make sexual and domestic violence deportable offenses. (The Senate has yet to take up the bill, but it would likely garner bipartisan support.)
This latest legislation, introduced by Republican Rep. Nick LaLota of New York, would prohibit federal funding to cities that aid or address undocumented immigrants.
“I recognize some Democratic colleagues see this issue differently, but at its core, my No Bail Out for Sanctuary Cities Act is about fairness,” LaLota told NOTUS in a statement. “Cities that declare themselves sanctuaries and refuse to enforce federal immigration laws should not expect federal taxpayers — including those in communities that follow the law — to bail them out for the consequences of their policies.”
Democrats have largely stayed out of the way when it comes to legislation that would address illegal immigration, especially for lawmakers in swingier states, as they work to try to win back their majority. But voters largely turned out for Republicans down ballot during the 2024 election because of their tougher stance on the issue, leaving Democrats questioning what went wrong with their strategy last election.
“We are fully supportive of making sure that criminals, violent criminals, are, in fact, deported,” House Minority Whip Katherine Clark said in a brief interview. “But we also know that there are roles for federal ICE and there are roles for states, and to tie federal funding for police officers who are doing their job legally in accordance with their state’s law is something that Democrats are not going to stand for.”
“It is politicizing our law enforcement, and that is not good for any citizen,” she added.
In the last two months, progressives have remained steadfast in their opposition to any bills that Republicans have put forth touching immigration, even as their more moderate colleagues vote with Republicans when the issue comes to a vote on the floor. But this time, Democratic leadership will formally whip their members against LaLota’s legislation when it comes to a vote potentially as soon as next week, a senior Democratic aide told NOTUS.
“It’s because it’s the bill that is not just about immigrants, right? And that’s why everyone else cares about it,” Delia Ramirez, a U.S. representative from the Chicago area, which could be affected by this legislation, said in an interview.
This isn’t the first time the sanctuary cities bill has been introduced by Republicans. Last Congress, when House Republicans had the majority, Republicans passed the bill 219-186 with 12 Democrats joining Republicans to pass it. But that was back when many of these bills from Republicans were used for messaging because Democrats held the Senate. Now with the Republican trifecta, this bill could become law.
Members of the Congressional Hispanic Caucus have been messaging against the legislation since it became clear that Republicans wanted to put it on the floor.
“My knee jerk reaction is I don’t want to defund my local law enforcement agencies in California,” House Democratic Caucus Chair Pete Aguilar, who’s also a member of the CHC, told NOTUS. “I don’t know why anyone, including House Republicans, would want to reduce funds that are going to those individuals who are protecting our communities, and that’s exactly what the Republican bill would do.”
Immigration advocacy groups, which some centrist Democrats have argued are largely out of touch with concerns from voters who turned out in 2024, have come out strongly against this legislation.
“The issue in the last election was that Americans didn’t know what Democrats stood for on immigration, that they needed to be more clear and louder about supporting balanced solutions, and that does include border security, but it needs to be efficient, sensible, humane, fair,” said Kerri Talbot, executive director at the Immigration Hub. “I think the lack of information from Democrats was really the challenge.”
It’s unclear how the centrist Blue Dog Coalition, whose handful of members are usually first in line to side with Republicans on immigration, will vote on the bill. Rep. Jared Golden, who formerly led the group, did not respond to a request for comment, and he isn’t known for sharing his votes ahead of time.
Regardless, if every House Republican votes for the bill when it comes to a vote, the bill would pass. It just depends on absences.
“Hopefully that every single Democrat will vote against it. Because this is not about immigrants, this is about stoking fear and harming entire states and cities,” Ramirez said. “This bill will end up paralyzing entire cities. I think that’s the difference in this bill versus the Laken Riley bill and the other bills.”
—
Daniella Diaz is a reporter at NOTUS.