Pennsylvania Senate passes bill targeting sanctuary cities |

Pennsylvania Senate passes bill targeting sanctuary cities

The Associated Press
| Tuesday, February 7, 2017 5:09 p.m

HARRISBURG — The Pennsylvania Senate advanced a measure on Tuesday that would cut off hundreds of millions of dollars in state subsidies to cities and counties that do not always honor detention requests from federal immigration authorities.

The measure targeting sanctuary cities dovetails with a national debate being spearheaded by Pennsylvania’s U.S. Sen. Pat Toomey and President Donald Trump, both Republicans, as a top law-and-order priority.

The Republican-controlled Senate passed the bill, 37-12. Every Republican voted for the bill, as did three Democrats.

The policies of sanctuary cities vary, but the term generally refers to places where local government officials will only honor U.S. immigration detention requests when they are accompanied by an arrest warrant.

During debate on the Senate floor, Republicans said the bill was meant to end those cities’ dangerous practices. Democrats countered that forcing cities to honor detention requests that are not backed by a warrant could trample on civil rights and expose the local governments to lawsuits.

The debate became emotionally charged when the bill’s sponsor, Sen. Guy Reschenthaler, R-Allegheny, suggested that questions about the legislation being asked by Sen. Vincent Hughes, D-Philadelphia, were not relevant.

“Any question that I ask on the floor of the Senate is relevant, let’s be clear about that,” Hughes shot back.

The House and Senate each passed a similar bill last year, but the bills died amid disagreements between the chambers. Toomey has sponsored legislation in Congress that would punish sanctuary cities by withholding certain federal grants, and Trump last month said he would cut federal grants for sanctuary cities.

Democratic Gov. Tom Wolf’s office said it was monitoring legislative and federal government activity on the issue. A spokesman said the office has concerns about the bill, including whether states can legally require that municipalities assist with the enforcement of federal immigration policy.

“We also have concerns about the impact on citizens and families from the loss of federal and state funding if municipalities or counties don’t comply,” spokesman JJ Abbott said.

Under the bill, Philadelphia, Pittsburgh and more than a dozen counties, including many of the most populous counties, could lose access to state subsidies that last year totaled $1.3 billion, according to a Senate Appropriations Committee analysis. That included law enforcement grants and money meant to protect neglected or troubled children, and the analysis cited a list of jurisdictions identified by the conservative Center for Immigration Studies.

The bill does not specify which state agency would determine which municipalities and counties qualify as sanctuary cities. Hughes said that as many as 32 counties could qualify.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.