Compliance with detainers; U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. (HB481)

Introduced By

Del. Bob Marshall (R-Manassas) with support from co-patron Del. Mark Cole (R-Fredericksburg)

Progress

Introduced
Passed Committee
Passed House
Passed Senate
Signed by Governor
Became Law

Description

Compliance with detainers; U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Requires the Director of the Department of Corrections or other official in charge of the facility in which an alien is incarcerated to comply with any detainer received from U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. The bill provides that no alien subject to the detainer shall be released except to transfer custody of the alien to another facility or to the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement, provided that no alien may be held in custody in excess of the date that he would otherwise be released from custody. The bill also waives sovereign immunity for any tortious injury or act committed by an alien released in violation of this requirement after his release. Read the Bill »

Status

03/31/2016: vetoed by governor

History

DateAction
01/08/2016Committee
01/08/2016Prefiled and ordered printed; offered 01/13/16 16103509D
01/08/2016Referred to Committee on Militia, Police and Public Safety
01/19/2016Assigned to sub: #2
01/19/2016Impact statement from DPB (HB481)
01/19/2016Assigned MPPS sub: #2
01/21/2016Subcommittee recommends reporting with amendment(s) (4-Y 3-N)
01/29/2016Reported from Militia, Police and Public Safety with substitute (13-Y 8-N) (see vote tally)
01/29/2016Committee substitute printed 16104781D-H1
02/01/2016Read first time
02/02/2016Passed by for the day
02/03/2016Read second time
02/03/2016Committee substitute agreed to 16104781D-H1
02/03/2016Engrossed by House - committee substitute HB481H1
02/04/2016Passed by for the day
02/05/2016Floor substitute printed 16105241D-H2 (Habeeb)
02/05/2016Engrossment reconsidered by House
02/05/2016Read second time
02/05/2016Committee substitute reconsidered 16104781D-H1
02/05/2016Committee substitute rejected 16104781D-H1
02/05/2016Substitute by Delegate Habeeb agreed to 16105241D-H2
02/05/2016Engrossed by House - floor substitute HB481H2
02/08/2016Read third time and passed House (68-Y 29-N)
02/08/2016VOTE: PASSAGE (68-Y 29-N) (see vote tally)
02/09/2016Constitutional reading dispensed
02/09/2016Referred to Committee on Rehabilitation and Social Services
02/17/2016Impact statement from DPB (HB481H2)
02/19/2016Passed by indefinitely in Rehabilitation and Social Services (12-Y 1-N 2-A) (see vote tally)
02/26/2016Reconsidered by Rehabilitation and Social Services
02/26/2016Reported from Rehabilitation and Social Services with substitute (8-Y 7-N) (see vote tally)
02/26/2016Committee substitute printed 16105703D-S1
02/29/2016Constitutional reading dispensed (38-Y 0-N) (see vote tally)
03/01/2016Impact statement from DPB (HB481S1)
03/01/2016Read third time
03/01/2016Reading of substitute waived
03/01/2016Committee substitute agreed to 16105703D-S1
03/01/2016Passed by for the day
03/02/2016Read third time
03/02/2016Reading of amendment waived
03/02/2016Amendment by Senator DeSteph agreed to
03/02/2016Passed by for the day
03/03/2016Read third time
03/03/2016Engrossed by Senate - committee substitute with amendment HB481S1
03/03/2016Passed Senate with substitute with amendment (21-Y 19-N) (see vote tally)
03/04/2016Placed on Calendar
03/07/2016Senate substitute with amendment agreed to by House 16105703D-S1 (65-Y 30-N)
03/07/2016VOTE: ADOPTION (65-Y 30-N) (see vote tally)
03/08/2016Enrolled
03/08/2016Bill text as passed House and Senate (HB481ER)
03/08/2016Impact statement from DPB (HB481ER)
03/08/2016Signed by Speaker
03/10/2016Signed by President
03/11/2016G Governor's Action Deadline Midnight, Monday, April 11, 2016
03/11/2016Enrolled Bill communicated to Governor on 3/11/16
03/11/2016G Governor's Action Deadline Midnight, Sunday, April 10, 2016
03/31/2016G Vetoed by Governor
04/20/2016Placed on Calendar
04/20/2016House sustained Governor's veto (65-Y 34-N)
04/20/2016VOTE: OVERRIDE GOVERNOR'S VETO (65-Y 34-N)
04/20/2016Requires 67 afirmative votes to override Governor's veto

Video

This bill was discussed on the floor of the General Assembly. Below is all of the video that we have of that discussion, 5 clips in all, totaling 21 minutes.

Transcript

This is a transcript of the video clips in which this bill is discussed.

DO ANY SENATORS DESIRE TO CHANGE THEIR VOTE? THE CLERK WILL CLOSE THE ROLL. AYES 22, NOS 17. AYES 22, NOS 17. THE BILL PASSES. HOUSE BILL 481, A BILL RELATING TO COMPLIANCE WITH DETAINERS, U.S. IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT, CRIMINAL INJURIES COMPENSATION FUND. REPORTED FROM COMMITTEE ON REHABILITATION AND SOCIAL SERVICES WITH A SUBSTITUTE. THE SENATOR FROM SPOTSYLVANIA, SENATOR RECEIVERS. THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT. I ASK THAT WE AGREE TO THE COMMITTEE SUBSTITUTE AND I WOULD ASK THAT THE BILL GO BYE FOR THE DAY.

Del. Bill Howell (R-Fredericksburg): THANK YOU, SENATOR. THE QUESTION IS SHALL THE COMMITTEE SUBSTITUTE BE AGREED TO. ALL IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION WILL SAY AYE. THOSE OPPOSED, NO. THE AYES HAVE IT. THE SUBSTITUTE IS AGREED TO. HOUSE BILL 481, WITHOUT OBJECTION, WILL GO BYE FOR THE DAY.

[Unknown]: HOUSE BILL 535, A BILL RELATING TO LIMITED LIABILITY FOR BEEKEEPERS. REPORTED FROM COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE, CONSERVATION AND


Sen. Bill Stanley (R-Moneta): A LITTLE BIT MORE AND GO BYE FOR THE DAY.

[Unknown]: WITH THAT OBJECTION, HOUSE BILL 158 WILL GO BYE FOR THE

Sen. Bill Stanley (R-Moneta): HOUSE BILL 481 A BILL DAY. RELATING TO COMPLIANCE WITH DETAINERS U.S. IMMIGRATION AND COMPENSATION FUND. REPORTED FROM THE COMMITTEE ON REHAB AND SOCIAL SERVICE WITH A SUBSTITUTE AND THE SUBSTITUTE WAS ADOPTED BY THE SENATE AND WE HAVE A FLOOR AMENDMENT.

[Unknown]: MR. PRESIDENT,. THE SENATOR FROM SPOTSYLVANIA. I WOULD MOVE THE FLOOR AMENDMENT GIVEN BY THE JUNIOR SENATOR FROM VIRGINIA BEACH. IF THAT IS APPROPRIATE. WAIVE THE READING. YIELD TO THE JUNIOR SENATOR. I WOULD BE HAPPY TO YIELD TO THE JUNIOR SENATOR. SENATOR DeSTEPH. MR. PRESIDENT, IF I MAY, I WOULD LIKE TO READ THE WAIVING OF THE FLOOR AMENDMENT BUT EXPLAIN WHAT IT DOES WHEN APPROPRIATE. THE REQUEST HE IS SHOULD THE READING OF THE FLOOR AMENDMENT BE WAIVED. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. THOSE OPPOSED, NO. THE AYES HAVE IT. THE READING OF THE FLOOR AMENDMENT IS WAIVED. THE JUNIOR SENATOR. MR. PRESIDENT, THE FLOOR AMENDMENT ADDS A LAWFUL DETAPER ORDER WHICH ADDRESSES THE CONSTITUTIONALITY CONCERNS THAT WERE WITHOUT UP ON THIS BILL. THANK YOU, SENATOR. THE QUESTION IS SHALL THE FLOOR AMENDMENT BE AGREED TO. ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE. THOSE OPPOSED, NO. THE AYES HAVE IT. THE FLOOR AMENDMENT IS AGREED TO. THE SENATOR FROM SPOTSYLVANIA. MR. PRESIDENT, I WOULD ASK THAT THE BILL BE ALLOWED TO GO BYE FOR THE DAY. THANK YOU, SENATOR. WITH THAT OBJECTION, HOUSE BILL 481 WILL GO BYE FOR THE DAY. MR. PRESIDENT,.
SENATOR STANLEY. THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT. CAN THAT GO BYE TEMPORARILY.

Del. Bill Howell (R-Fredericksburg): WITHOUT OBJECTION, HOUSE BILL 168 WILL GO BY TEMPORARILY.

[Unknown]: HOUSE BILL 481, A BILL RELATING TO COMPLIANCE WITH DETAINERS, U.S. IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT, CRIMINAL INJURIES COMPENSATION FUND. REPORTED FROM THE COMMITTEE ON -- I'M SORRY, THE COMMITTEE SUBSTITUTE AND FLOOR AMENDMENT HAVE BEEN ADOPTED BY THE SENATE. THE SENATOR FROM SPOTSYLVANIA, SENATOR REEVES. THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT. THIS IS A BILL THAT WAS BROUGHT UP IN THE COMMITTEE THAT HAD TO DO WITH -- THAT WOULD DIRECT THE DIRECTOR OF THE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS OR OTHER OFFICIALS IN CHARGE OF SUCH FACILITY IN WHICH AN ALIEN IS INCARCERATED, WHO RECEIVES A LAWFUL DETAINER NOW FROM U.S. IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT, AND IT SHALL -- THAT INDIVIDUAL SHALL NOT BE RELEASED EXCEPT FOR TRANSFER CUSTODY OF THE ALIEN TO ANOTHER FACILITY OF THE U.S. IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS END FORM, PROVIDED THAT THE -- ENFORCEMENT, BROAD/GLENSIDE THAT NO ALIEN MAY BE HELD IN CUSTODY IN EXCESS OF THE DATE THAT HE OR SHE WOULD OTHERWISE BE RELEASED FROM CUSTODY. IT CODIFIES REQUIREMENT GIVEN TO THE DEPEND OF CORRECTIONS BY U.S. IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT TO HOLD ALIENS FOR AN ADDITIONAL TIME IF THEY'RE UNDER RETAINER AND I WOULD YIELD TO THE SENATOR -- SENIOR SENATOR FROM LOUDOUN FOR FURTHER QUESTIONS, MR. PRESIDENT. I WOULD ASK THE PASSAGE OF THE BILL. THANK YOU, SENATOR. DID YOU WANT TO SPEAK TO THE BILL AS WELL? YES, MR. PRESIDENT. THANK YOU. THIS -- THE BILL MAKES QUITE CLEAR THAT NO ONE CAN BE HELD BEYOND THEIR SENTENCE DATE, AND THAT IS THE IMPORTANT THING. AND WE'RE ONLY TALKING ABOUT PEOPLE WHO ARE BEING HELD ON A -- OR WHO ARE SUBJECT TO A DETAINER BECAUSE THEY HAVE COMMITTED CRIMINAL ACTS AND SO I HOPE THAT YOU WILL PASS THE BILL. THANK YOU, SENATOR. THE SENATOR FROM FAIRFAX CITY, SENATOR PETERSEN. THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT. SPEAKING AGAINST THE BILL. THE SENATOR HAS THE FLOOR. MR. PRESIDENT, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN OF THE SENATE, THIS BILL ACTUALLY HAD A COUPLE DIFFERENT LIVES IN OUR COMMITTEE, WAS KILLED AT ONE POINT AND THEN BROUGHT BACK, AND THE BOTTOM LINE IS THE EXISTING LAW IS ACTUALLY FRET SIMPLE AND PRETTY -- PRETTY SIMPLE AND PRETTY EASY TO FOLLOW FOR SHERIFFS. WHAT WE'RE DOING IF WE CHANGE IT IS ALMOST CONTRADICT STORY. WE'RE TELLING THEM THEY CANNOT RELEASE A SUBJECT OR AN INMATE THAT HAS A DETAINER ON THEM, BUT IF IT'S SUBJECT TO ICE, BUT THAT'S SAYING IF ICE DOESN'T COME AND PICK THEM UP, WE CAN'T KEEP THEM PAST THEIR LAWFUL CUSTODY DATE. IF THEY'RE ON A DETAINER FROM ICE, THEY CAN ALREADY BE RELEASED TO ICE. WE'VE MADE THAT PERFECTLY CLEAR IN THE EXISTING LAW. I THINK IF BEE GO FORWARD WITH -- WE GO FORWARD TO AMENDMENT TO THE STATUTE STH, BILL, WE'RE BASICALLY TELLING THEM THEY CAN HOLD PEOPLE UNDETAINER IF THEY ALREADY SERVED THEIR SENTENCE, WHICH IS I DON'T THINK THE SHERIFFS WERE UNKOOSHLG. CRAZY ABOUT THE BILL FOR BEGIN WITH AND EVEN AMENDED, I DON'T THINK IT MAKES IT BETTER AND I HOPE WE DEFEAT THE BILL. THE SENATOR FROM ARLINGTON, SENATOR FAVOLA. WOULD THE SENIOR SENATOR FROM LOUDOUN YIELD FOR A QUESTION? WOULD THE SENIOR SENATOR FROM LOUDOUN YIELD FOR A QUESTION. I YIELD. I YIELDS, SENATOR. THANK YOU, MR. PRESIDENT. WHAT BOTHERS ME IS, I GUESS LINE 16 WHERE YOU -- WHERE THE SENTENCE SAYS THAT HOWEVER, IF A FEDERAL OR STATE LAW REQUIRES THAT SUCH AN ALIEN BE HELD IN CUSTODY UNTIL TRANSFER TO A FEDERAL AUTHORITY, AS I READ THAT, AND I BELIEVE MANY SHERIFFS ARE READING IT, THE INTERPRETATION IS, IS THAT IN FACT, OUR LOCAL JAILS WOULD HAVE TO HOLD THESE INDIVIDUALS UNTIL ICE ACTUALLY PICKS THEM UP. IS THAT YOUR READING OF THIS? THE SENIOR SENATOR. I UNDERSTAND THE GENTLELADY'S QUESTION. THE SITUATION THAT THAT CONTEMPLATES IS A SITUATION WHERE WE HAVE AN INDIVIDUAL WHO IS IN CONFINEMENT AND PERHAPS IT IS DETERMINED WHILE HE IS IN CONFINEMENT AND WHILE THERE IS A DETAINER OUT FOR HIM THAT HE HAS COMMITTED SERIAL RAPE OF SEVERAL SOMETHING NOT HAVING ANYTHING TO PEOPLE. DO WITH WHY THE DETAINER IS OUT THERE, BUT A REASON THAT INDEPENDENTLY WOULD -- INDEPENDENTLY OF THIS BILL OR ANYTHING, WOULD REQUIRE THAT THEY HOLD HIM BECAUSE OF THAT. THAT'S THE REASON FOR THAT PARTICULAR LINE. IT DOESN'T REALLY RELATE TO THE DESTAINER ITSELF. IT SIMPLY SAYS, ALTHOUGH YOU -- UNDER THE DETAINER, THE DETAINER DOES NOT GIVE YOU AUTHORITY TO HOLD THEM BEYOND THEIR TERM OF SERVICE. THEY'VE GOT TO BE RELEASED. HOWEVER, THERE IS ANOTHER REASON THAT SOMEBODY COULD BE HELD AND THAT WAS THE PURPOSE IN THAT LANGUAGE. MR. PRESIDENT, SPEAKING TO THE BILL, SPEAKING TO THE MOTION. THE SENATOR HAS THE FLOOR. THE WAY THE SENIOR SENATOR EXPLAINS THE BILL, IT SOUNDS LIKE THE BILL IS NOT NEEDED BECAUSE UNDER CURRENT PRACTICE, OUR SHERIFFS HOLD INDIVIDUALS AS LONG AS THEY'RE SUPPOSED TO BE HELD ACCORDING TO WHATEVER STATE OR FEDERAL STATUTE WOULD BE GOVERNING WHY THE INDIVIDUAL IS EVEN IN JAIL TO BEGIN WITH. IF IN FACT ICE IS CONTACTED, THE SHERIFFS WILL ONLY HOLD THE INDIVIDUAL CONSTITUTIONALLY BASED ON THE AMOUNT OF TIME THAT WOULD BE ASSOCIATED WITH WHATEVER THE LEGAL PROCESS IS FOR THE CRIME THEY ALLEGEDLY COMMITTED. SO THAT'S OUR CURRENT PRACTICE. AND I BELIEVE THAT THIS ADDS AN ELEMENT OF CONFUSION BECAUSE I THINK OUR LOCAL GOVERNMENTS AND OUR SHERIFFS ARE READING THIS TO MEAN THAT THE INTENT OF THE LANGUAGE IS TO KEEP AN INDIVIDUAL BEYOND, BEYOND WHATEVER STATE OR FEDERAL LAW MIGHT SUGGEST BECAUSE THE ICE INFORMATION IS INTERJECTED AND, YOU KNOW, ICE HAS LOTS OF PEOPLE ON THEIR DATABASE, THEY ISSUE LOTS OF DETAINERS, AND THEY SAY, YOU KNOW, JUST KEEP THESE INDIVIDUALS AND YET, LOCAL GOVERNMENTS DO NOT HAVE THE SPACE OR THE MONEY TO KEEP THEM AND ICE DOESN'T PICK THEM UP. SO I SEE NO PURPOSE FOR THIS BILL BECAUSE THE LOCAL GOVERNMENTS ARE ALREADY CONDUCTING THEIR BUSINESS THE WAY WE HAD JUST EXPLAINED, AND I THINK THIS WOULD BE VERY, VERY CONFUSING. SO I ASK THAT THE BODY VOTE AGAINST THIS. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, SENATOR. THE SENATOR FROM ROANOKE CITY, SENATOR EDWARDS. MR. PRESIDENT, FIRST, WITH REGARD TO THIS BILL, OUR STATE AND LOCAL AUTHORITIES ARE NOT ICE. THEY'RE NOT THE IMMIGRATION AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT. THAT'S A FEDERAL LAW -- FEDERAL AGENCY AND THEY HAVE THEIR RESPONSIBILITIES WITH REGARD TO IMMIGRATION ISSUES. THE PROBLEM ARISES WHEN ICE DOES NOT PICK THEM UP. THE LOCAL AUTHORITIES NOTIFY ICE, NOTHING HAPPENS. AND THIS BILL, I THINK WHAT IT ATTEMPTS TO DO, ALTHOUGH SOMEWHAT CONFUSING, BUT PROBABLY THIS IS WHY THE SHERIFFS DON'T LIKE IT, THAT THEY'RE REQUIRED TO RELEASE A PERSON BASED ON A JUDGE'S ORDER OF BAIL, BOND, FOR EXAMPLE, OR WHATEVER UNDER STATE OR LOCAL LAW AND THEY SHOULD RELEASE A PERSON. AND THERE'S ICE OUT THERE WHO HASN'T COME TO PICK UP ANYBODY, AND SO THERE'S -- THIS BILL, SEEMS TO ME, TRIES TO SAY IF ICE IS NOT DOING IT'S JOB, LET'S DO THE JOB FOR THEM, AND I KNOW THE LOCALITIES DON'T WANT ZO DO THAT. THEY DON'T HAVE THE RESOURCES TO DO THAT, THEY SHOULDN'T DO THAT. IF ICE IS NOT GOING TO DO ITS JOB, IT'S NOT GOING TO DO ITS JOB. THAT'S A PROBLEM FOR ICE. [ CAPTIONING WILL RESUME SHORTLY ]


Del. Bob Marshall (R-Manassas): YOU DON'T TRUST MY WORD?

[Unknown]: NO. NO. DON'T PUT THAT INTO A VOTE. OKAY. LET ME EXPLAIN THIS, MR. SPEAKER. THIS IS A PUBLIC SAFETY MEASURE I INTRODUCED AT THE REQUEST OF MICHAEL CARERA, A MEMBER OF THE MANNASES PARK CITY COUNCIL, THE SON OF TWO LEGAL IMMIGRANTS FROM SOUTH AMERICA. THE SUBSTANTIVE CHANGES EMBODIED IN THIS SUBSTITUTE WERE DEPRIVED FROM OBSERVATION BY THE SHERIFF'S ASSOCIATION. WHEN THIS LEFT THE HOUSE THERE WAS AN EXPRESSED REFERENCE TO A COMPENSATION AGENCY IN THE COMMON WEALTH OF VIRGINIA. THE SHERIFFS THOUGHT THIS MIGHT BE A SPECIAL FAVOR TO A GROUP. SO I REMOVED THAT AT THEIR REQUEST. THE SHERIFF POINTED OUT IT IS NOT JUST ICE INDIVIDUALS WHO PICK UP INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE REQUESTED FOR DETAINERS. SOMETIMES, U.S. MARSHALS. AND INCLUDE THE WORDS AND THE REQUEST TO HOLD SOMEBODY LEGALLY, AND THIS IS LEGAL, SO WE TALK ABOUT THE LEGAL HOLDING ACCORDING TO FEDERAL OR STATE LAW, WHICH IS A 48-HOUR PERIOD. SO IF YOU LIKE THE ORIGINAL BILL, I THINK YOU SHOULD LIKE THIS ONE, MR. SPEAKER. THE EFFECT IS MAKING HONORING DETAINERS IN VIRGINIA TO AVOID CIRCUMSTANCES LIKE KATE STEINLE, WHO WAS KILLED BY AN ILLEGAL IMMIGRANT BECAUSE OF THE POLICY OF THE CITY OF SAN FRANCISCO. I REFERENCED AND WILL REPEAT THAT A REQUEST OF THE IMGRIGSS CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT INDICATED THAT IN VIRGINIA, A 15 MONTH PERIOD THERE WERE 29 REQUESTS FOR DETAINERS NOT HONORED. AND HALF OF THE PEOPLE WERE INVOLVED IN CRIMINAL OFFENSES. SO I URGE THE SUBSTITUTE AND AMENDMENT, FLOOR AMENDMENT, TECHNICAL AMENDMENT, AS WELL.

Del. Bill Howell (R-Fredericksburg): SHALL THE SENATE SUBSTITUTE BE AGREED TO? CLERK WILL CLOSE THE ROLL.

[Unknown]: AYE, 65, NO, 30.
IF HE SAID I DON'T LIKE THIS POLICY, I WOULD HAVE UNDERSTOOD THAT, AND FINE. BUT HE USED WORDS THAT MIGHT RUN AFOUL OF RULE 57. HOUSE BILL 481 REQUIRES LOCAL JAILS TO A REQUEST FROM THE OBAMA ADMINISTRATION IMMIGRATIONS AND CUSTOMS ENFORCEMENT AGENCY. IF THE SHARE ALLOWED FOR ICE, IT'S GOOD. IF HE DOES IT ON HIS OR HER OWN. BUT IF DIRECTED TO HOLD THE SAME IMMIGRANT FOR 48 HOURS FOR EVERY PRISONER, REQUESTED BY ICE, NOT JUST MOST, THE GOVERNOR CONSIDERS THIS INEQUITABLE. IN LOGIC, THIS IS CALLED A CONTRADICTION. IN RICHMOND, THIS IS CALLED A VETO. THE GOVERNOR CLAIMS HOUSE BILL 41 PROMOTED IRRATIONAL FEARS OF NONCITIZENS IN THE COMMONWEALTH. THE INDIVIDUALS ARE NOT MERELY LIVING IN VIRGINIA BUT RESIDE IN JAILS BECAUSE OF CRIMES COMMITTED IN THE COMMON WEALTH OF VIRGINIA. 26 ATTORNEYS WERE SUING PRESIDENT OBAMA AND HOUSE BILL 481 IS A PUBLIC SAFETY MEASURE. A FREEDOM OF INFORMATION REQUEST RELATED TO LOCALITIES 29 ICE PRISONERS IGNORING DETAINER REQUESTS. ON JULY 1, KATE STEINLE WAS SHOT AND KILLED BY JUAN SANCHEZ LOPEZ AFTER HE WAS RELEASED BY SHERIFF ROSS MIRKARIMI THOUGH ICE REQUESTED THE SHERIFF DETAIN MR. SANCHEZ LOPEZ. THE REQUEST WAS DENIED THOUGH MR. SANCHEZ LOPEZ WAS IN AMERICA ILLEGALLY WITH SEVERAL FELONY CONVICTIONS AND HAD BEEN DEPORTED TO MEXICO FIVE TIMES. THE CITY OF SAN FRANCISCO PROVIDED A SANCTUARY FOR FOUR MID WEST CITIZENS WERE MURDERED BY AN ILLEGAL ALIEN WANTED BY ICE. IF YOU DO NOT VOTE TO OVERRIDE GOVERNOR McAULIFFE'S VETO, WHAT WILL YOU TELL THE RELATIVES OF THOSE INJURED OR KILLED BY AN ILLEGAL ALIEN NOT TURNED OVER TO DEPORTATION. ICE BECAUSE THE LOCAL SHERIFF DECIDED THEY CAN IGNORE AN ICE DETAINER? YOU HOPE YOU TELL THEM YOU DID EVERYTHING YOU COULD.

Del. Bill Howell (R-Fredericksburg): GENTLEMAN FROM ARLING TOON, MR. LOPEZ.

Del. Alfonso Lopez (D-Arlington): THANK YOU, MR. SPEAKER. HB 481 IS UNNECESSARY. VIRGINIA LAW LEAVES IT TO LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT ABOUT HOW TO RESPOND WITH ORDERS RECEIVED BY ICE. THIS RAISES CONCERNS ABOUT UNLAWFUL DETAINERS. LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT ALSO TRANSFERS THESE INDIVIDUALS INTO FEDERAL CUSTODY WHEN THEY'VE BEEN PREVIOUSLY DEPORTED AND RETURNED ILLEGALLY. TRADITIONALLY, ICE HAS NOT TAKEN CUSTODY OF THOSE NOT COMMITTING OFFENSES THAT DEEM THEM TO BE A RISK TO PUBLIC SAFETY. THIS BILL DOES NOT IDENTIFY COSTS FOR DETAINING INDIVIDUALS WHO MUST WAIT BUT THERE IS A FISCAL IMPACT ON LOCAL JAILS AND COMMUNITIES. THIS IS A DEFINITE IMPACT ON THE FISCAL HEALTH OF LOCAL JAILS AND DOES NOTHING OTHER THAN SUBJECT CITIZENS TO UNLAWFUL TREATMENT. THE BILL IS INTENDED TO COMMUNICATE A SENSE NONCITIZENS ARE TO BE FEARED AND THIS IS DOG WHISTLE POLITICS AT IT'S FINEST. RATHER THAN STOKING IRRATIONAL SAFETY IN VIRGINIA. HB 41 MAKE NOSE ONE SAFER. AND STAGMATIZES MANY PEOPLE WHO ARE CAUGHT UP IN A BROKEN IMMIGRATION SYSTEM. FEARS WE SHOULD APPROVE PUBLIC THE CHIEF RAISED CONCERNS ABOUT POTENTIAL AND COOPERATE WITH THOSE WHOSE OFFENSE IS THEIR ILLEGAL PRESENCE. I HOPE THE BODY WILL SUPPORT THE GOVERNOR'S VETO OF HB 41, A BILL THAT IS UNNECESSARY AND OVERLY COSTLY FOR LOCALITIES.

[Unknown]: SHALL THE HOUSE VOTE TO OVERRIDE THE GOVERNOR'S VETO?

Del. Alfonso Lopez (D-Arlington): AYE, 65, NO, 34. MOTION IS NOT AGREED TO.

Comments

ACLU-VA Immigrants Rights, tracking this bill in Photosynthesis, notes:

The ACLU of VA strongly opposes this bill. Virginia already complies with ICE detainers and this bill would create unnecessary confusion and liability with local sheriffs and law enforcement.