The HELD Act withholds federal funding from state and local governments that hinder federal immigration enforcement by obstructing information sharing or compliance with immigration detainers.
Ken Calvert
Representative
CA-41
The HELD Act aims to ensure cooperation between state and local law enforcement and federal immigration authorities. It withholds federal funding from states and local governments that prevent their law enforcement agencies from sharing information with or honoring detainer requests from the Department of Homeland Security regarding immigrants in custody. The goal is to facilitate the transfer of custody of these immigrants to federal authorities for potential detention or removal proceedings. The Act also allows subdivisions of a state to apply for direct funding if the state is not eligible.
HELD Act: Feds to Withhold Funds from Cities, States Not Complying with Immigration Detainers
The "Help Ensure Legal Detainers (HELD) Act" aims to tighten the federal government's grip on immigration enforcement by cutting off certain federal funds to states and localities that don't play ball with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) detainers. Let's break down what that actually means.
Dollars for Detainers
The core of the HELD Act is simple: If a state or local government has any policy that prevents its law enforcement agencies from fully cooperating with ICE, they risk losing federal funding. This specifically targets two key areas:
- Information Sharing: Local law enforcement must respond to requests from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) about immigrants in their custody. This includes providing info like release dates (SEC. 2). Think of it like this: if ICE wants to pick someone up when they're released from local jail, the jail has to tell ICE when that's happening.
- 48-Hour Holds: Local law enforcement must honor ICE detainers, which are requests to hold someone for up to 48 hours after their scheduled release (SEC. 2). This gives ICE time to decide what to do with the person – detain them further, start removal proceedings, or let them go.
The Real-World Squeeze
Imagine a city with a policy of not holding people solely on ICE detainers, maybe because of concerns about wrongful detention or strained community relations. Under the HELD Act, that city could lose federal money that might fund anything from road repairs to after-school programs. It is important to understand that a local police department might arrest an individual for something minor, like unpaid parking tckets. This act could potentially force that department to hold that person much longer than they would have otherwise.
There's a carve-out, though: If a smaller local government (like a county) is willing to cooperate, but their state isn't, that county can apply directly to the feds for funding (SEC. 2). It's like a loophole for local entities caught in the middle.
The Bigger Picture: Federal Power vs. Local Control
The HELD Act raises some big questions about the balance of power. Can the federal government use funding to essentially force states and cities to follow its lead on immigration? This gets into the tricky area of "commandeering," where the feds can't directly order state/local officials to enforce federal law. But withholding funds? That's a powerful incentive, and it's what this bill is all about.
It also brings up practical challenges. Local law enforcement agencies might have limited resources, and holding people for ICE could strain those resources further. Plus, there's the risk of mistakenly detaining someone who shouldn't be held, leading to potential legal trouble.
Ultimately, the HELD Act is a move to strengthen federal immigration enforcement by putting financial pressure on states and cities. Whether that's a good or bad thing depends on your perspective, but it definitely shifts the power dynamics in the ongoing debate over immigration policy.