Mandates the detention of aliens charged with or convicted of theft, burglary, assault of a law enforcement officer, or crimes resulting in death or serious bodily injury, ensuring they are not released back into communities. Requires the Department of Homeland Security to issue detainers for these individuals.
John Cornyn
Senator
TX
The "Public Safety First Act" mandates the detention of aliens who have committed theft, burglary, assault of a law enforcement officer, or any crime resulting in death or serious bodily injury. It amends the Immigration and Nationality Act to ensure these individuals are detained throughout their immigration proceedings. The Department of Homeland Security is required to issue detainers for these aliens, ensuring they are taken into custody.
Public Safety First Act: Mandatory Detention for Aliens Charged with Theft or Assault on Law Enforcement
The Public Safety First Act (SEC. 1) significantly expands the grounds for mandatory detention of certain non-citizens within the U.S. immigration system. The core change (SEC. 2) is this: If a non-citizen, who is already considered inadmissible under specific existing immigration laws (section 212(a)), is charged with, arrested for, or convicted of theft, burglary, larceny, shoplifting, or assault of a law enforcement officer, they must be detained by immigration authorities.
Locking Up More People
This bill dramatically broadens who can be locked up under immigration law. Previously, mandatory detention focused on more serious crimes. Now, even a charge of shoplifting or theft, as defined by the local jurisdiction where the alleged offense occurred, triggers mandatory detention. This means someone could be detained based on an accusation, even before a conviction. The bill requires the Secretary of Homeland Security to issue a detainer for these individuals, meaning Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) will take custody once any local criminal proceedings are finished (SEC. 2).
Real-World Rollout: Uneven Justice?
Here's where it gets tricky. Imagine two people, both non-citizens, accused of shoplifting a $20 item. One is in a state where 'shoplifting' has a broad definition; the other is in a state with a narrower definition. Under this law, one might be mandatorily detained, while the other might not, for the same action. This reliance on local definitions of crimes (SEC. 2) could lead to wildly inconsistent application of federal immigration law across the country. A construction worker accused of a minor theft could find themselves in immigration detention, separated from their family, simply because of where the alleged incident happened.
The Bigger Picture: More Detainees, More Problems?
The bill mandates that the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) must issue detainers and take custody (SEC. 2). This raises a practical question: Does DHS have the resources – the detention space, the personnel – to handle a potentially significant increase in detainees? Prolonged detention, even before a hearing on the underlying immigration case, raises serious due process concerns. It's also worth noting that private prison companies, which often contract with the government to run detention facilities, could see a financial benefit from this increase in the detained population. The bill makes no mention of additional funding for this purpose, which is a glaring omission. The law also references Section 236(c) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, tying it to existing regulations regarding detention. The lack of clarity on how this will be implemented alongside current laws creates potential for confusion and legal challenges.