Overview
Title
To deny Federal funding to any State or political subdivision of a State that has in effect any law, policy, or procedure that prevents or impedes a State or local law enforcement official from maintaining custody of an alien pursuant to an immigration detainer issued by the Secretary of Homeland Security, and for other purposes.
ELI5 AI
The "HELD Act" is a plan that would stop giving money to places that don't help the government catch people who are in the country without permission. It also says that smaller areas in those places can try to get money directly if the big place they are in isn't following the rules.
Summary AI
H. R. 1821, known as the "Help Ensure Legal Detainers Act" or "HELD Act," proposes to deny federal funding to any state or local government that has laws, policies, or procedures preventing law enforcement from cooperating with immigration detainers. Specifically, it targets jurisdictions that do not respond to immigration notices or refuse to hold individuals for up to 48 hours for immigration authorities. Moreover, it allows subdivisions in states affected by this funding denial to apply directly for federal funds they would otherwise receive indirectly. This bill seeks to ensure local cooperation with federal immigration enforcement efforts.
Published
Keywords AI
Sources
Bill Statistics
Size
Language
Complexity
AnalysisAI
General Summary of the Bill
The bill, titled the "Help Ensure Legal Detainers Act" or "HELD Act," aims to restrict federal funding to any U.S. state or local government that implements laws or policies hindering state or local law enforcement from cooperating with immigration detainer requests. These requests come from the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and are aimed at maintaining custody of individuals for immigration-related proceedings. A notable feature of the bill allows individual local governments within non-compliant states to directly apply for federal funds if otherwise intended through subgrants or allocations by an ineligible state.
Summary of Significant Issues
Several critical issues arise from the bill's provisions:
Timely Compliance: The bill’s requirement that states "timely" respond to DHS requests lacks clarity, potentially resulting in inconsistent enforcement and legal challenges.
Federal Funding Restriction: The withholding of federal funds could be seen as punitive and may particularly impact states with policies designed to protect undocumented immigrants.
Direct Funding to Localities: Allowing political subdivisions to directly receive federal funds if their states are non-compliant could create administrative challenges and raise questions of federalism and state rights.
Logistical Challenges: The requirement to maintain custody of individuals for up to 48 hours, excluding weekends and holidays, might pose logistical burdens for local law enforcement agencies.
Language Sensitivity: The use of the term "alien" within the text may be perceived as outdated or insensitive, potentially diminishing support for the bill.
Impact on the Public
Broadly, the bill could significantly alter how federal funding flows to state and local governments, directly affecting programs relying on such funds. States failing to comply with the bill's requirements stand to lose financial support, which could impact public services ranging from infrastructure projects to social programs. The bill seeks to enforce cooperation with federal immigration enforcement, which could affect community-police relations, especially in diverse communities where trust in law enforcement is critical.
Impact on Specific Stakeholders
State and Local Governments: Compliant state and local governments may continue receiving federal support, while those opposing the bill’s requirements could face financial strain. This tension might be amplified in states that prioritize the protection of undocumented immigrants.
Law Enforcement Agencies: Local police departments might face operational challenges due to the 48-hour custody provision, requiring additional resources and infrastructure.
Immigrant Communities: Individuals in undocumented communities might experience increased anxiety or disruption as local law enforcement’s role in immigration enforcement could heighten.
Federal Government: The bill represents an assertion of federal power over state policies concerning immigration, reinforcing the federal government's stance on enforcing immigration laws but risking disputes over states' rights.
Legal System: Ambiguities in the bill might prompt legal challenges, as states and localities seek to interpret “timely” compliance and navigate the complexities of federalism involved in direct funding applications.
In conclusion, the "HELD Act" raises several nuanced issues that underscore the complexities of immigration policy, federalism, and public administration in the United States. The bill could reshape dynamics between state and federal authorities while impacting a wide range of stakeholders differently.
Issues
The restriction on federal funds could be seen as punitive and may disproportionately affect states with policies aimed at protecting undocumented immigrants. This issue is relevant to Section 2 and raises concerns about the balance of state autonomy versus federal power.
The bill's language may create ambiguity regarding the timeframe in which states must comply with federal immigration detainer requests, as it does not specify what constitutes 'timely' compliance. This vague language in Section 2 could lead to inconsistent enforcement and potential legal challenges.
The allowance for political subdivisions to directly receive federal funds if their state is ineligible could create administrative complexities and potential legal challenges regarding federalism and state rights. This potential issue also arises from the provisions described in Section 2.
The exception for maintaining custody of an alien for up to 48 hours excluding weekends and holidays may create logistical issues for local law enforcement, as outlined in Section 2. This could impact resource allocation and operational efficiency of local police departments.
The term 'alien' is sometimes considered outdated and could be seen as insensitive or politically charged, potentially reducing the bill's support. The use of this term throughout Section 2 might provoke criticism from advocates for more inclusive language.
Sections
Sections are presented as they are annotated in the original legislative text. Any missing headers, numbers, or non-consecutive order is due to the original text.
1. Short title Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The first section of the act states its title. It may be called either the "Help Ensure Legal Detainers Act" or simply the "HELD Act".
2. Denial of Federal funding to States and units of local government that fail to respond to immigration detainers Read Opens in new tab
Summary AI
The section states that starting after the bill is enacted, federal funding will not be given to any state or local government that does not cooperate with immigration detainer requests from the Department of Homeland Security. It further clarifies that if a specific local government within an otherwise non-compliant state still wants federal funds, it can apply directly for them, bypassing the state.