Goodlatte Statement at Hearing Examining DOJ’s Role in Crafting New Orleans Sanctuary Policy

Washington, D.C. – House Judiciary Committee Chairman Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.) today delivered the following opening statement at the Immigration and Border Security Subcommittee hearing on “New Orleans: How the Crescent City Became a Sanctuary City.” Chairman Goodlatte: Sanctuary cities refuse to cooperate with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement in its enforcement of federal immigration laws.  The proliferation of sanctuary cities has resulted in thousands of criminal aliens being released into our neighborhoods to commit more crimes. Sanctuary cities violate federal law.  Two decades ago, Congress enacted a provision—Title 8, section 1373—designed specifically to prevent jurisdictions from enacting policies that prohibit their employees from sharing information with ICE about illegally present or criminal aliens. There are more than 300 sanctuary jurisdictions in the United States.  One of these is the City of New Orleans. In 2010, the current Mayor of New Orleans invited the Department of Justice to review the policies of the New Orleans Police Department (NOPD), apparently in part to transform New Orleans into a sanctuary city. Former Attorney General Eric Holder, former Assistant Attorney General for the Civil Rights Division, Thomas Perez, now Secretary of Labor, and the Mayor appear to have colluded to have DOJ file a lawsuit against the City and then have DOJ and the City enter into a settlement agreement—or consent decree—that would forbid NOPD from cooperating with ICE. The resulting consent decree actually required NOPD to develop a plan that prohibited officers from taking any enforcement action based on an individual’s immigration status. In February of this year pursuant to the consent decree, NOPD issued a policy prohibiting officers from inquiring about an individual’s immigration status.  More troubling, it generally prohibited officers from assisting or supporting ICE’s immigration enforcement and it required officers to decline all ICE requests for support or assistance. Thus, New Orleans could claim that DOJ’s heavy hand forced it to become a sanctuary city and endanger its residents, when in fact, it was a willing participant. The consent decree was a shocking action on the part of DOJ.  The chief law enforcement agency of the federal government acted to impede the enforcement of federal law.  In addition, the policy appears to be in direct violation of section 1373.  Yet, it was reviewed and approved in advance by DOJ’s Civil Rights Division.  This appears to be another example of the current DOJ’s cavalier disregard for the Constitution and the law. Chairman Gowdy and I sent a letter to the Attorney General in May, asking that she explain how the NOPD policy complies with section 1373 and requesting that she provide communications with New Orleans concerning the development of the policy. DOJ’s response was almost completely nonresponsive. The DOJ Inspector General issued a report in May that expressed concern that ambiguous language in some sanctuary policies may cause local officers to comply with such policies in a way that would violate section 1373. The Inspector General noted that, “unless the understanding of NOPD’s employees is that they are not prohibited or restricted from sharing immigration status with ICE, the policy would be inconsistent with section 1373.” I have asked for the training materials that NOPD gave to its officers to ensure their understanding of section 1373.  I have been provided with nothing.  This leads to a troubling possibility that through a lack of training, NOPD has in practice violated section 1373. Finally, just four days before this hearing, after this committee’s persistent efforts to expose this disturbing matter and demand action, DOJ informed the Committee that NOPD had revised its sanctuary policy. Specifically, the NOPD policy now states that it is to be construed in accordance with section “1373(a).”  On that basis, DOJ has represented to the federal court and this Committee that the policy now complies with section 1373. Unfortunately, this coordinated effort by DOJ and the City of New Orleans to preserve the patina of legality of their consent decree clearly fails.  Section 1373(b) prohibits jurisdictions from restricting their employees from “requesting” information from ICE, “maintaining” such information, and “exchanging” information with other agencies.  Nowhere does the revised policy require compliance with this subsection. A NOPD officer that arrests an individual who is believed to be illegally present is most likely going to contact ICE to “request” information regarding that individual’s immigration status.  However, the revised NOPD policy expressly prohibits NOPD officers from making “inquiries into an individual’s immigration status.” DOJ and NOPD have provided no evidence that NOPD in practice has complied with section 1373.  And they have provided no training materials showing that officers have or will be properly trained regarding compliance with section 1373. NOPD received over $2 million in law enforcement grants from DOJ in FY 2015.  As Attorney General Lynch has essentially admitted to John Culberson, Chairman of the House Appropriations Committee’s Subcommittee with jurisdiction over DOJ, if NOPD is in violation of section 1373, it would be disqualified from receiving these grants.  Yet, DOJ has made no effort to cut off grants to New Orleans. Even aside from the likely violation of federal law, DOJ’s actions in this case show that the protection of our constituents and the enforcement of federal law no longer seem to be priorities of the Department.  In fact, DOJ seems to view them as roadblocks, impeding its chosen policy preferences. I want to thank our witnesses for appearing today. I look forward to their testimony and to learning more about this new NOPD policy, including why it still prohibits compliance with Section 1373(b). ###