The Utah Senate shut down this House immigration bill. Why?
After six weeks of work, the Senate is slamming the door on some of them in a stated effort to limit the number of new criminal enhancements, while letting some pass through if they slim up.
Senate Minority Leader Luz Escamilla, D-Salt Lake City, told the Deseret News on Friday that the Senate is applying strict scrutiny because the House filed around 80 bills this session that would toughen up law enforcement responses.
Senate Judiciary Chair Todd Weiler, R-Woods Cross, told Rep. Ryan Wilcox, R-Ogden, on Friday that he needed to be convinced
Wilcox's bill, which enhanced penalties for street gang recruitment and theft, was necessary.
'We can't continue to enhance everything every year,' Weiler said. 'It's an unsustainable course.'
On Friday, the Senate Transportation Committee signaled the end of the road for Rep. Matt MacPherson's proposal that would have discouraged unlicensed driving, with little discussion even after the bill passed with large margins in the House.
The bill, HB392, was brought forward at the request of law enforcement across the state who reported a surge in interactions with drivers without a license.
In 2023, unlicensed drivers made up nearly 50% of the 2,000 serious car crashes in West Valley City, according to data published by the city police department. Nearly 50% of individuals identified in hit-and-runs were also unlicensed.
The bill would have allowed law enforcement to seize a vehicle without a warrant if the driver did not possess a driver's license, permit or privilege card.
In addition to increasing the penalty for driving without a license from an infraction to a misdemeanor, the bill would have implemented towing and identification requirements similar to those followed by police officers in cases of reckless driving or driving under the influence.
One of the biggest problems highlighted by law enforcement that the bill would have addressed was the inability for police to ticket these drivers because many of them do not have identification. The bill would have required police to take a quick fingerprint of an unlicensed driver.
Following the hearing, MacPherson, R-West Valley, said the Senate's goal of filtering out criminal enhancements should not be applied indiscriminately based solely on factors like jail capacity or funding.
'I think that unless it is done with careful thought, you risk ignoring real problems in our communities that still rely on the rule of law,' MacPherson said.
The Senate has shown a desire to address an increase in immigrant crime after four years of historic immigration as long as it pertains to repeat offenders or is very narrowly tailored to violent crimes.
On Thursday, the Senate presented its consensus immigration law enforcement bill to the House where it received a unanimous recommendation for a floor vote with just one week left in the 2025 legislative session.
SB90, Mandatory Jail Sentence Amendments, would require mandatory jail sentences for drug and theft crimes committed by individuals who were previously convicted of one of these crimes, deported and then found to have reentered the country illegally.
Bill sponsor Sen. Calvin Musselman, R-West Haven, referred to one instance of an unauthorized immigrant apprehended by local law enforcement who had previously been deported 11 times.
'They were clearly tied to organized crime,' Musselman said. 'There's almost a revolving door there. ... That's what this is trying to stop.'
Musselman's bill would require someone who is convicted of a crime in Utah following criminal reentry into the United States to be sentenced with at least 90 days in jail for a class C misdemeanor, 180 days for a class B misdemeanor and 360 days for a class A misdemeanor or felony.
The bill would prohibit an individual who receives one of these mandatory jail sentences from being turned over to the federal government for deportation until the person has served the entire mandatory jail sentence.
It would allow local law enforcement to coordinate with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement on deportation proceedings during the 14-day period before the final day of the individual's jail sentence.
One of the central House bills related to state and national efforts to address crimes committed by immigrants underwent significant changes before the Senate said it could advance for a floor vote.
Rep. Candice Pierucci's HB226 would partially reverse a 2019 law, passed unanimously, that decreased the maximum sentence for a class A misdemeanor by one day, to 364 days, in an attempt to skirt federal immigration policy that allows the immediate deportation of legal or illegal immigrants who are sentenced to 365 days or more.
After her bill failed in committee earlier this week, Pierucci, R-Riverton, was able to bring it back on Friday on the condition that she removed certain provisions.
The bill originally increased penalties for nonprofit groups that knowingly transported unauthorized immigrants into the state. This portion was removed, as was language allowing DUI's to trigger automatic deportation.
The current version of the bill would increase the minimum sentence by one day only for violent class A misdemeanors like sexual abuse and assault.
During meetings with ICE officials over the last year, the state's one-day sentencing reduction was repeatedly identified as an obstacle for federal authorities seeking to work with Utah law enforcement to deport immigrants who are in the country illegally, Pierucci said.
'Our 364 to 365 did make Utah somewhat of a target and somewhat of a magnet and made it difficult for us to work with ICE as they worked on deportation,' Pierucci told committee members.
Pierucci's bill would codify law enforcement best practices of coordinating with federal immigration authorities before releasing an immigrant charged with a class A misdemeanor or a felony.
It would also require the immigration status of arrested individuals to be submitted to a court as part of the probable cause statement and would give judges the presumption that individuals are considered a flight risk for bail if they are not lawfully present in the country.
Escamilla voted against the bill, along with Weiler, arguing the bill would have a disproportionate affect on immigrants lawfully in the country, like green card holders, refugees and temporary visa recipients.
'These are misdemeanors and they are misdemeanors for a reason. And the moment we trigger that piece it's a completely different impact for lawfully present individuals,' Escamilla said.
But this kind of disagreement is what makes the the bicameral system best for making good policy, according to Pierucci.
On Wednesday, Musselman and Sen. Mike McKell, R-Spanish Fork, voted against Pierucci's bill. Three days later, after Pierucci narrowed the size and scope of her bill, they jumped on board.
'The House and Senate are very different,' Pierucci said. 'This is the way the process works.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
New York Post
23 minutes ago
- New York Post
Former AG Bill Barr shared ‘new' details on Jeffrey Epstein's prosecution, death in House deposition: GOP chairman
WASHINGTON — Former Attorney General Bill Barr shared 'new' details about the sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein — and his death in federal custody before heading to trial — during a deposition with the House Oversight Committee on Monday, according to the panel's chairman. Oversight Chair James Comer (R-Ky.) divulged to reporters that Barr's testimony to House lawmakers and committee staff had revealed 'a lot' on odd circumstances surrounding Epstein's federal prosecution and suicide. 'We asked a lot of questions about the, you know, the suicide,' Comer said, noting the 'general consensus' among Barr, FBI Director Kash Patel, independent medical experts and federal investigations is that the disgraced financier took his own life in a Manhattan lockup on Aug. 10, 2019. 5 Former Attorney General Bill Barr shared 'new' details about the sex trafficker Jeffrey Epstein — and his death in federal custody before heading to trial — during a deposition with the House Oversight Committee on Monday. AP The Oversight chairman added that he personally had 'no idea' whether Epstein, 66, killed himself. 'There were blind spots in the in the cameras,' Comer said. 'It's unfortunate … there weren't people in there watching because this is such a high-profile case. … I'm very disappointed in the security. 'We've learned some new things pertaining to different aspects of it, but we've got a lot of people to depose, and we'll release all the transcripts once we get through,' he added. 5 Oversight Chairman James Comer added that he personally had 'no idea' whether Epstein, 66, killed himself. AP Barr's testimony also affirmed an FBI-DOJ assessment provided in a memo last month on the absence of any so-called 'client list' that Epstein allegedly kept of rich and powerful associates potentially implicated in his sickening crimes. The former AG also denied having ever discussed the client list with Trump and suggested that if the 45th president had been involved in Epstein's trafficking network, former President Joe Biden's Justice Department would've leaked any association. In addition to Barr, Attorney General Pam Bondi was subpoenaed for records related to the government's prosecutions of Epstein, his now-convicted accomplice Ghislaine Maxwell and a non-prosecution agreement stemming from an earlier state case against the disgraced financier in the mid-2000s. 5 'There were blind spots in the in the cameras,' Comer said. 'It's unfortunate … there weren't people in there watching because this is such a high-profile case. … I'm very disappointed in the security.' CBS 60 MINUTES That agreement was overseen by then-Miami US Attorney Alex Acosta, later Trump's Labor secretary during his first administration, and Democratic lawmakers said that they'd like to issue him a subpoena as well. Reps. Suhas Subramanyam (D-Va.) and Jasmine Crockett (D-Texas) told reporters that the Oversight panel should seek testimony from Acosta on Epstein's prosecution. 'We have more questions now than we did going in — and we want more answers and more people to talk to,' said Subramanyam. 5 Asked about their newfound focus on Epstein after nearly five years of silence, the Dems noted that Trump had campaigned on the issue of releasing information on the deceased sex criminal to the public. Department of Justice Barr was one of nearly a dozen former federal officials issued a subpoena by the Oversight panel — including former President Bill Clinton, former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, attorneys general stretching from Biden's term to the administration of George W. Bush and two former FBI directors. Asked about their newfound focus on Epstein after nearly five years of silence, the Dems noted that Trump had campaigned on the issue of releasing information on the deceased sex criminal to the public. 'Listen, this is a promise, I will tell you, that was not made by Kamala Harris. It's not a promise that was made by Joe Biden. This was a promise that was made by Donald Trump,' Crockett said. 5 'Listen, this is a promise, I will tell you, that was not made by Kamala Harris. It's not a promise that was made by Joe Biden. This was a promise that was made by Donald Trump,' Crockett said. AP 'We'll bring in everyone that we think can add information to the investigation,' added Comer. 'This is a serious investigation. This is a sincere investigation. I hope this will be a bipartisan investigation. I would encourage my Democrat colleagues not to politicize this.'
The Hill
23 minutes ago
- The Hill
Jeffries: Noem will be among the first ‘hauled up to Congress' if Democrats retake House
House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-N.Y.) said Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem would be a top oversight target if Democrats retake the House in the midterms. 'It's my expectation that Kristi Noem will be one of the first people hauled up to Congress shortly after the gavels change hands to get a real understanding for the American people as to this conduct that has taken place: the lack of respect for due process, for the rule of law, the unleashing of masked agents on law-abiding immigrant communities, and the disappearing of people in some instances, to other countries without any real evidence that criminal behavior took place,' Jeffries said in an interview with Tim Miller on The Bulwark's podcast. 'All of this is going to require aggressive oversight activity.' Jeffries nodded to a number of controversial actions taken by the Trump administration, from sending Venezuelan migrants to a notorious megaprison in El Salvador to side-stepping due process with actions such as moving to dismiss immigration court cases as a way to initiate expedited removal proceedings and bypassing review by a judge. Masked agents have also been conducting arrests at courthouses and in immigration enforcement actions across the country. Jeffries added that he supported the deportation of immigrants who have been convicted of violent crimes, 'but not law-abiding immigrant families, including in some instances, U.S. citizen children who've been sent overseas to a place that they've never known.' Jeffries said Reps. Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.) and Jamie Raskin (D-Md.), who would lead the House Homeland and Judiciary committees if Democrats flipped the House, would likely play a key role in such efforts. 'We'll figure out what the formulation looks like,' he added. While President Biden was in office, House Republicans impeached then-Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas, saying he violated the law, the Secure Fence Act of 2006, by failing to detain every migrant that crossed the border. The Senate swiftly rejected the impeachment.
The Hill
23 minutes ago
- The Hill
Everyone loses in a redistricting war
Gerrymandering, a wonky topic previously discussed mainly among AP history students and political scientists, has recently dominated national news headlines. In the fight for control of Congress after the 2026 midterm elections, governors of several states are opting to hijack the decennial process for partisan advantage, rather than letting voters decide directly who should represent them in Congress. Election analyst and redistricting expert Dave Wasserman recently referred to what's happening as the 'gerrymandering apocalypse.' CNN referred to it as a 'battle royale.' And Gov. Kathy Hochul (D-N.Y.) said, 'we are at war.' It's easy to point fingers at Gov. Greg Abbott (R-Texas) and say 'he started it!' Abbott acquiesced to President Trump's suggestion that the state take up redistricting mid-cycle and draw five additional Republican seats — a seemingly desperate attempt to avoid the ' midterm curse, ' where the incumbent president's party typically loses House seats in a midterm election. But the Archduke Ferdinand in the war on redistricting isn't Texas, it's actually Ohio. There's a famous adage relevant here: 'So goes Ohio, so goes the nation.' And over the past two redistricting cycles, Ohio has gone down a very gerrymandered path that the nation now seems to be following. In matters that extend beyond Ohio and gerrymandering, it is imperative that we pay attention to what is going on in statehouses around the country, ' laboratories of autocracy ' as they are often rightly called, for a glimpse into the corruption that awaits our national politics. Ohio has some of the most gerrymandered maps in the nation. Its state legislature and Republican-dominated redistricting committee gerrymandered maps through a series of secret backroom deals, disregard of multiple court orders, and a deliberate strategy of confusing voters to sabotage attempted reform. They even tried to impeach the Republican chief justice of the Ohio Supreme Court for ruling their rigged maps unconstitutional. But while state politicians were gerrymandering Ohio, unfortunately, few people were paying attention. Despite repeatedly breaking the rules, there was no accountability for the elected officials who took part in the scheme. To the contrary, most who participated were rewarded with electoral districts they were guaranteed to win, and a veto-proof majority in the state legislature. This has allowed Republicans in the state to pass unpopular laws that aren't supported by most voters. Take, for example, Ohio's Heartbeat Law, which outlawed abortion after six weeks of pregnancy. Poll after poll showed that a majority — nearly 60 percent — of Ohioans supported abortion rights, with only 32 percent opposed and 10 percent undecided. These numbers have held relatively steady over several years. However, the 2019 legislative vote passing the bill seemed to reflect the inverse; the Ohio House passed the measure 56-40 and the Ohio Senate 18-12. Although average voters around the country weren't paying attention to what was happening in the Buckeye State, political operatives were. What happened in Ohio is now serving as a playbook for what we are seeing in states like Texas, Missouri and Florida. The governors and state legislatures of these states have indicated that they are willing to cheat to win. The Trump administration has demonstrated its willingness to ignore court orders it does not like. And, if they continue to do so, we will likely have a Congress that continues to pass legislation that is unpopular with voters. Politics is often like physics, in that for every action, there is an equal and opposite reaction. Democrats have indicated they are willing to fight back by gerrymandering blue states such as California and New York. Some have praised them for this effort, with one Democratic consultant stating: 'There's anger among Democrats, and they wonder why their elected leaders aren't doing everything they can to fight back. … Kathy Hochul is out there saying, 'I'll do everything I can to fight back — including gerrymandering the s–t out of New York.'' But as the redistricting wars escalate, it is also a reminder that, as in any war, no one actually wins. Regardless of which party controls Congress after the 2026 midterms, voters in both red and blue states will be disenfranchised, in direct violation of the Supreme Court's ' one man, one vote ' edict . Both Democrats in red states and Republicans in blue states will be without any genuine form of representation. And even those who have a congressman of their preferred party affiliation will likely be represented by a more extremist candidate whose policy positions aren't reflective of the people in that district. As noted by The Associated Press, 'gerrymandering, once a feared accusation, has now become a battle cry.' If there's any lesson we can take away from the fight, it's that the lines we need to redraw aren't those separating congressional districts, but the ones we are willing to cross to ensure our side wins at all costs.
