Proposed Bill Threatens to Cut All Federal Funding for Cities Not Complying with Immigration Detainers

The newly proposed Mobilizing Against Sanctuary Cities Act is a straight-up, high-stakes financial ultimatum aimed at local governments. Simply put, this bill would give the Attorney General the power to immediately cut off nearly all federal funding to any state or local jurisdiction deemed a “sanctuary jurisdiction”—meaning they aren't fully cooperating with federal immigration enforcement requests.

The Compliance Test: What Puts Your City at Risk?

This isn't about vague policy debates; it’s about specific actions. Under Section 2, the Attorney General would have to check annually whether a jurisdiction is failing two key tests. First, are they complying with existing federal law requiring cooperation with immigration enforcement? Second, and most critically, are they ignoring specific requests from Homeland Security (DHS)—like a detainer request—to hold someone for federal agents, or failing to notify DHS when a person is about to be released from local custody? If the AG determines a city or state failed either test, that jurisdiction gets flagged.

The Financial Hammer: Losing the Federal Lifeline

Here’s where the rubber meets the road for everyday folks. If a jurisdiction is flagged as non-compliant, it immediately loses eligibility for all Federal financial assistance. We’re talking about the broad definition of federal funding—money that pays for everything from highway maintenance and public transit to school lunch programs, local law enforcement grants, and community health centers. This isn't a targeted fine; it's a total financial shutdown for at least one full year. Think about the impact: if your city loses the federal money that funds its public safety programs, or the state loses the grants that repair the bridge you drive over daily, you’re the one who ultimately pays the price through reduced services or local tax hikes.

Who Holds the Keys to the Treasury?

The bill places significant power in the hands of the Attorney General. Once the funding is cut, the money doesn’t flow again until the AG officially certifies to Congress that the jurisdiction has fixed the problem and is back in compliance. This means a single federal official holds the ultimate veto power over billions of dollars in local funding based on a jurisdiction's adherence to federal immigration priorities. For local governments trying to manage budgets, this introduces massive financial instability and a powerful incentive to change local policy quickly, even if it conflicts with existing local ordinances or community priorities. This is a classic case of the federal government using the power of the purse to enforce policy at the local level, turning federal funds into a powerful lever for immigration enforcement.