About 20 Michigan Communities With Sanctuary Policies Could Lose Funding Under Proposed Bills

Epoch Times

30-04-2025

A package of bills that would eliminate the sanctuary policies of an estimated 20 communities across Michigan has cleared the Michigan House Oversight Committee and is headed for a vote in the Republican-controlled state House of Representatives.
The bills are HB
The 20 local governments have adopted, to some degree, policies of non-cooperation with federal immigration authorities when it comes to illegal immigration. Michigan is not a sanctuary state but has allowed individual municipalities to make their own decisions on the subject.
A sanctuary community seeks to prevent harassment, discrimination, and deportation for illegal immigrants, while ensuring their access to health care, education, legal aid, and language classes, according to an online
Under the proposed legislation, noncompliant communities could face the loss of statutory state revenue-sharing funds as a penalty.
As of April 18, Muskegon County has been
Related Stories
9/23/2024
4/1/2021
The Muskegon County administrator's office did not respond to a request for comment.
The proposed new laws set forth a two-option enforcement mechanism.
Option one says that 61 days after the laws are enacted, an individual may sue the alleged violating community in the local circuit court. The complainant may seek an injunction restraining the prohibited sanctuary actions and a court order to ensure the law is obeyed.
The proposed statute requires the court to order the offending local government to amend or repeal its sanctuary policies.
According to the proposed laws, the court must award actual damages, costs, and reasonable attorney fees to the prevailing individual challenging a municipality's sanctuary policies.
The second enforcement option would also become active 61 days after the enactment date of the act. It says an individual may file a complaint form supplied by the state attorney general, who then must investigate the allegations against the alleged noncompliant unit of local government.
The law, if enacted, would require the locality to cooperate with the attorney general's investigation.
If a violation is confirmed, the attorney general must bring a legal action like the one described above in the locality's circuit court. If the attorney general prevails, the court is bound by law to follow the above-mentioned mandates to stop the practice.
Michigan state Rep. Cam Cavitt.
Courtesy of the Michigan House Republicans
Republican state Rep. Cam Cavitt, the chief sponsor of the legislation, said in a
Cavitt said that he somewhat understands the desire of some local officials to help people.
'But what they don't understand is that allowing people to live here illegally–putting up this false flag of protection–does nothing but keep people in the shadows and invite the worst criminals, gangbangers, and traffickers into our communities,' he said.
Cavitt stated that despite the federal government's crackdown on illegal immigration, local law enforcement continues 'to have regular interactions with illegal immigrants.'
'It should be no surprise that we're seeing violent gangbangers, perverts, scammers, and all sorts of other criminals flocking to Michigan to hide from the feds. ... We should be doing everything we can to get these criminals out of our country. Instead, some radical Michigan communities are bending over backward to obstruct immigration officials at every turn,' Cavitt said.
State Rep. Mike McFall, a Democrat who voted against advancing the bills out of committee, did not respond to a request for comment by publication time.
State House Minority Leader Ranjeev Puri, a Democrat, also did not respond to a request for comment.
Before the bills can become law, they must be passed by the Democrat-controlled Senate and survive a potential veto by Gov. Gretchen Whitmer.