[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 161 (2015), Part 11]
[Senate]
[Pages 16065-16078]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




  STOP SANCTUARY POLICIES AND PROTECT AMERICANS ACT--MOTION TO PROCEED

  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. Under the previous order, the 
Senate will resume consideration of the motion to proceed to S. 2146, 
which the clerk will report.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk read as follows:

       Motion to proceed to Calendar No. 252, S. 2146, a bill to 
     hold sanctuary jurisdictions accountable for defying Federal 
     law, to increase penalties for individuals who illegally 
     reenter the United States after being removed, and to provide 
     liability protection for State and local law enforcement who 
     cooperate with Federal law enforcement and for other 
     purposes.

  Mr. REID. Madam President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will call the roll.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. NELSON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Coats). Without objection, it is so 
ordered.


               Tragedy of the Lost Cargo Ship ``El Faro''

  Mr. NELSON. Mr. President, on September 29, an almost 800-foot cargo 
container vessel, the El Faro, a cargo ship carrying 33 men and women 
from Florida, left port in Jacksonville, FL, bound for Puerto Rico. 
There is a regular trade route between San Juan and Jacksonville, and a 
lot of the goods the Puerto Rican Commonwealth receives are shipped by 
cargo container from the Port of Jacksonville.
  Three hours before it left port, the tropical storm that had been 
brewing had changed its status from a tropical storm to a hurricane, 
and over the course of the next 2 days, with communications from the 
ship, that hurricane started to intensify, starting out as a category 
1, category 2, and later a category 3.
  On the morning of the third day, October 1, at 7 a.m., there was a 
communication from the captain of the ship, first left on a voice mail 
and then he immediately called back the person in the communications 
department of the shipping company who talked to the captain. The 
captain, in a very calm voice on both the telephone message voice mail 
and his communication with the person, said they had taken a position 
where the ship was leaning 15 degrees. They were in rough seas, and 
they had lost power. Apparently in that communication, his voice was 
very calm and had some degree of confidence that he was going to be 
able to get the ship back underway, under power.
  It is not good to have a ship that is tilting 15 degrees in the 
middle of a storm, much less an oncoming hurricane, and with no power 
because that does not allow you to keep it directly into the waves or 
going away from the waves. Instead, the ship is going to turn 
broadside, with the full force of the waves hitting the side of the 
ship, and the ship was already listing 15 degrees to one side.
  Well, that was the last communication. The hurricane had turned in a 
southwesterly direction, and eventually, according to the forecast, it 
finally made that turn to the right to start taking it north, and as a 
result it did not hit the continental east coast of the United States. 
It was out to the east of the Bahama Islands.
  The hurricane was still in the vicinity, so it was another 2 days 
before the hurricane subsided enough that the U.S. Coast Guard could 
get in there, supplemented by the U.S. Navy, to start looking for 
survivors.
  Let me say something about the Coast Guard. We have the Coast Guard 
in our jurisdiction in the Commerce Committee. It is an extremely 
professional military operation. I spent time this past summer with the 
Coast Guard up in Alaska. They are so good at what they do that the 
U.S. Navy can take its resources and use them elsewhere on the Alaska 
coast, which includes the Bering Sea and the Bering Strait, which we 
share with Russia, and the Coast Guard does an extraordinary job. Of 
course, throughout the Caribbean and all around my State of Florida, 
the Coast Guard stands tall. They rescue folks.
  It took them some time before they could get their C-130s flying in--
and some of those may well have been Air Force. Until the Coast Guard 
could get their C-130s and H-60 helicopters with the swimmers who 
propel down from the helicopter to rescue survivors--it took them that 
long, and they started seeing debris.
  I have seen a picture of the lifeboat. It is an old lifeboat, an open 
lifeboat. If you saw the movie ``Captain Phillips,'' Captain Phillips 
and the people who had taken over the ship went in that covered orange 
lifeboat. They propelled it off the back of the ship, and it dove into 
the water. These were just plain lifeboats. They found a life preserver 
floating. Indeed, they found a life preserver suit, which is a body 
suit that inflates when in the water. When the helicopter finally got 
there and checked it, they found no survivor in it. They saw remains. 
They were still actively searching for any survivors. In this 
particular case, when the swimmer went into the water, there were only 
remains left in the body suit, partially decomposed and so forth. This 
Senator cannot say enough about the Coast Guard.
  Those who were on that ship were from the State of Florida. Maritime 
work is a part of our culture, and we know the extreme importance of 
these jobs and the very real risk mariners face in their tough jobs. 
They are taken away from home for weeks and months to do hard work. 
Without our maritime efforts, we could not survive. That is where the 
biggest part of our shipping from other places is, on the sea, and our 
mariners provide this critical service. They move products and

[[Page 16066]]

cargo that drive our economy. Look at the economic engines of the 
seaports.
  This has been a tremendous loss for us--not the loss of the cargo, 
which was certainly an economic loss, but the loss of 33 lives. It is 
especially a loss for the families and friends who knew and loved the 
crew of the El Faro. We share their grief.
  The loss of this ship raised many questions, so over the recess I 
went to Jacksonville. I went to the port. I talked to the National 
Transportation Safety Board. I talked to the Coast Guard. They have 
opened an investigation. I am giving these remarks to the Senate at 
this time because tomorrow we expect a preliminary report from the 
National Transportation Safety Board.
  In dock is the sister ship, the El Yunque. One ship would be in one 
port and the other ship in the other port, and they would cross. In 
fact, those two ships crossed in the Caribbean within sight of each 
other before the El Faro, heading southeast, got into trouble. So I 
wanted to go there because it is our Commerce Committee that has the 
job of seeing that these agencies are doing as thorough a job as 
possible.
  We expectantly await that report. I know we want all of the answers 
right now. It is important that a thorough examination is conducted to 
find out exactly what happened. For the families and friends of those 
lost on the El Faro, and for the safety of all mariners, we are going 
to make sure that we get the answers.
  What would I speculate? Well, I certainly do not have the expertise 
in the sea. But if you get a call and the captain's voice is calm, and 
he says that we are listing 15 degrees, then there has been some breach 
of the ship. Likely, there is water inside of the ship. If in that same 
phone call that you get he is saying that we have lost power, then we 
know that there is the making of a disaster. Why didn't the captain and 
the crew know that the hurricane had become a hurricane that was 
announced by the National Weather Service and the National Hurricane 
Center 3 hours before they left the Port of Jacksonville? What caused 
the captain to think he could sail, and sail in the direction of an 
oncoming hurricane, and that he would not get into its effects? Why did 
the engines cut off so that he lost power? All of these things we don't 
know, but we expectantly look forward to getting some answers maybe in 
this preliminary report tomorrow.
  So, in honor of those lost on board the El Faro, I would simply 
conclude my remarks by asking for a moment of silence.
  Thank you.
  I yield the floor.
  I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, I can still remember the day in June a few 
years ago, June 27, 2013--2\1/2\ years ago. The Senate gathered and 
voted on comprehensive immigration reform. The vote was 68 to 22. The 
bill meant a lot to many of us. Eight of us--four Democrats and four 
Republicans--had literally worked for months trying to craft a bill to 
address the massive immigration system in America, a system that is 
terribly broken.
  I think it surprised a lot of people, but we did it. Democrats and 
Republicans agreeing on something--there is a headliner. Who sat across 
the table? Not an easy jury to decide any issue when it came to Senate 
business. On our side of the table were Chuck Schumer of New York, 
chair of the Senate immigration subcommittee of the Judiciary Committee 
at that point; myself; Bob Menendez, Hispanic American Senator from the 
State of New Jersey; and Michael Bennet of Colorado--four of us.
  On the opposite side of the table, John McCain led the effort on the 
Republican side, along with Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, who had a 
background in law enforcement in the military and is currently running 
for President. Next to him, Marco Rubio from the State of Florida, 
Cuban American, came to this undertaking. He, too, is running for 
President of the United States; and Jeff Flake of Arizona, a 
conservative Republican.
  We worked for months. We went through every provision and came to a 
bipartisan agreement to move the bill forward. We passed it 68 to 22. I 
think it would have been a dramatic improvement over the current laws 
or lack of laws in America.
  The House of Representatives refused to call it up, wouldn't even 
bring the matter before its committees, and never had a debate on any 
immigration issue in the 2\1/2\ years since. They missed an 
opportunity, an opportunity to do something important and a rare 
opportunity where Democrats and Republicans happened to agree on a 
solution. That is hard to come by in this place.
  This bill would have strengthened border security, cracked down on 
illegal immigration, protected American workers, and established a 
tough but fair path for 11 million undocumented immigrants in this 
country who are currently living here, and it gave them a path to legal 
status. They would pay their taxes, pay their fines, go through a 
criminal background check, and then they would be eligible--not before 
then.
  Democrats were in the majority of the Senate at that moment. We 
reached across the aisle to work with Republicans, so the bill was 
truly bipartisan. Well, it is a shame that the Republican-controlled 
House of Representatives would not even consider the bill. We asked 
them: Just call the bill. If it is going to be defeated, call it.
  No, we are not going to consider any immigration reform--and they 
have not.
  We are in a new Senate now, a new Senate under control of the other 
party, and what has been the approach to immigration? Unfortunately, 
little time has been spent trying to find common ground. First, some 
Senate Republicans threatened to shut down the Department of Homeland 
Security. This is the Department that not only has us take our shoes 
off at the airport, they are literally trying to protect us from 
another act of terrorism in the United States. For months, the Senate 
Republicans refused to pass an appropriations bill to fund the 
Department of Homeland Security until the Democrats would accept anti-
immigrant amendments. After we repeatedly rejected this approach, they 
finally relented and passed a clean appropriations bill for this 
important Department for America's security.
  Now here we go again. Some Senate Republicans have brought partisan 
legislation to the floor--and understand this--to defund, remove the 
funding from law enforcement efforts in this country. I don't know what 
is happening in many places, but I do know what is happening in the 
Midwest. We have seen violent crime, gun-related crime, go up 
dramatically, a 20-percent increase in gun-related deaths this year in 
Chicago over the previous year. In the city of Milwaukee, there is a 
100-percent increase in gun-related crime this year.
  So why would we even consider a bill that is before us on the floor 
of the Senate, offered by the Senator from Louisiana, to reduce funding 
for law enforcement and police departments? Senator Vitter has offered 
a bill that would block important police, disaster relief, and other 
funding from communities that do not share immigration information with 
the Federal Government or don't hold a detainee at the behest of 
Federal immigration authorities. My Republican colleagues know this 
bill has no chance to become law. They have made no effort to engage 
the Democrats in a bipartisan conversation. It may pass the Senate--but 
I doubt it--and if it does, the President would veto it. This is done 
for reasons other than passing a bill and creating a new law.
  Some of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle claim they were 
responding to the tragic--and, yes, it was tragic--death of Kate 
Steinle, a young woman who was allegedly shot and

[[Page 16067]]

killed by Francisco Sanchez, an undocumented immigrant with a long 
criminal history. Mr. Sanchez had several drug convictions. He 
illegally reentered the United States several times after he was 
deported. Earlier this year, he finished his third prison sentence for 
illegal reentry.
  The Bureau of Prisons should have turned Mr. Sanchez over to the 
Immigration and Customs Enforcement Department to be deported, but 
instead they sent him to San Francisco to face a 20-year-old marijuana 
charge. Not surprisingly, local authorities decided not to prosecute 
this old charge, so sadly, unfortunately, tragically he was released. 
This never ever should have happened. Federal and local authorities 
must do a better job of communicating and coordinating so undocumented 
immigrants with serious criminal records are detained and deported, 
period.
  The bill before us doesn't solve the problem which I have just 
described. It wouldn't have prevented the tragic death of this young 
woman. In fact, this legislation would actually make us less safe by 
threatening communities with the loss of millions of dollars in 
critical Federal funding for local law enforcement, as well as 
discouraging immigrants from cooperating with local police.
  The Chicago Tribune--not known as any liberal publication--published 
an editorial opposing the bill that is coming before us. They said: 
``Threatening to take money away from local police is a sound bite, not 
a solution.''
  Republican Congressman Bob Dold, from my home State of Illinois, was 
one of five Republicans who voted against the House version of the 
bill. He said: ``Cutting funding for local law enforcement would not 
have prevented this horrible crime.''
  What would the consequences be of passing the Vitter bill that is 
pending before the Senate? At risk are tens of millions of dollars in 
funding from several programs. The State Criminal Alien Assistance 
Program, also known as SCAAP, helps cover the costs for States and 
localities to detain undocumented immigrants with serious criminal 
records; the Community Oriented Policing Services Grant Program--which 
we all know about from serving in the Senate because our local police 
departments benefit from COPS funding; and the community development 
block grants provide critical funding for local communities for 
disaster relief and other priorities.
  I wish to give some examples from Illinois of the impact of the 
Vitter bill. In fiscal year 2014, Cook County--our largest county--
received $1,381,552 in SCAAP funding, and in fiscal year 2015, Chicago 
received $72,477,673 in CDBG funding, and $3,125,000 in funding through 
the COPS Hiring Program to address gun violence.
  The Fraternal Order of Police sent a letter opposing the Vitter 
bill--which is before the Senate--on behalf of its 330,000 police 
members who belong to that fraternity. This is what it said: ``It is 
wrong and a gross unfairness to punish these brave men and women, or 
the citizens they serve, because Congress disagrees with their 
enforcement priorities with respect to our nation's immigration laws.''
  This bill is supposedly an effort to punish so-called sanctuary 
cities--including some in my own home State--that have policies 
limiting dealings between Federal immigration authorities and local law 
enforcement, but the goal of these policies is to promote effective 
community policing by encouraging immigrant communities to trust local 
police. Many of these policies were established in response to Secure 
Communities, a program created by the Bush administration and a program 
which badly damaged the relationship between immigrant communities and 
local law enforcement around the country.
  My State police signed a memorandum of agreement with immigration 
authorities to participate in Secure Communities. The agreement said 
the goal of the program was to ``identify, detain, and remove from the 
United States aliens who have been convicted of serious criminal 
offenses.''
  However, it turned out more than 30 percent of those deported from 
Illinois in the program had no criminal record. Less than 20 percent 
had been convicted of a serious crime. Illinois law enforcement 
officials say the program eroded trust in law enforcement in the 
Hispanic community. Their conclusion is backed up by polling data. A 
2013 University of Illinois study found that 44 percent of Latinos 
report being less likely to contact the police if they are a victim of 
crime out of fear that police will inquire about their immigration 
status or people they know.
  The Vitter bill makes this problem even worse by forcing local law 
enforcement to become enforcers of immigration laws. I received a 
letter opposing the Vitter bill from the Law Enforcement Immigration 
Task Force, a group of more than 30 law enforcement officials, 
including Republican Lake County Sheriff Mark Curran, a local law 
enforcement official from my home State whom I have worked with in the 
past. These officials are very concerned that this bill will make our 
communities less safe by discouraging immigrants from cooperating with 
law enforcement.
  This is what the local law enforcement in Illinois said:

       When state and local law enforcement agencies are required 
     to enforce federal immigration laws, undocumented residents 
     may fear that they, or people they know or depend upon, risk 
     deportation by working with law enforcement. This fear 
     undermines trust between law enforcement and the communities 
     we serve, creating too much room for dangerous criminals and 
     violent crime.

  The Vitter bill also dramatically increases penalties for illegal 
entry, including two new mandatory minimum criminal sentences. 
Estimates are that these new penalties created by the Vitter bill would 
require approximately 18,600 new prison beds and up to 12 new Federal 
prisons. New Federal prisons cost several hundred million dollars to 
construct, tens of millions of dollars to operate. In sum, these new 
mandatory minimums will cost taxpayers billions of dollars. There is no 
suggestion in this bill of how we would pay for that.
  The real solution to this problem is smart and targeted immigration 
enforcement that encourages cooperation with local law enforcement. The 
Homeland Security Department only has enough funding to deport a small 
fraction of the undocumented immigrants in our country. President Obama 
has wisely said we should focus on those who could do us harm. In fact, 
85 percent of those deported from the interior of our country in fiscal 
year 2014 had a criminal conviction--and they should have been 
deported--compared to only 38 percent in 2008 under the previous 
President. This President's policies has focused our limited resources 
on deporting dangerous people, deporting felons, not families; 
criminals, not children.
  As part of the effort to target immigration enforcement, Secretary of 
Homeland Security Jeh Johnson has established the Priority Enforcement 
Program, also known as PEP, to replace security communities. PEP is 
designed to protect our safety while improving trust between local 
police and communities they serve. The program enables DHS to work with 
State and local law enforcement to take custody of individuals who pose 
a danger to public safety before they are released. PEP has only been 
operational for a short time. We need to give it a chance to work 
before we rush in to pass this legislation which could only make the 
problem worse.
  The best way to fix our broken immigration system, incidentally, and 
make our communities safer is to pass comprehensive immigration reform 
once and for all. The bill the Senate passed in 2013 would have made 
unprecedented investments in border security, would have cracked down 
on employers who hire undocumented immigrants, and ramped up interior 
enforcement of immigration laws.
  The bill would have invested $46 billion in new resources in border 
security, including no fewer than 38,405 U.S. Border Patrol agents 
along the southern border, enhanced penalties for increased immigration 
violations with sentences of up to 20 years for those with criminal 
histories, and increased penalties for passport and immigration 
document trafficking and fraud.

[[Page 16068]]

  Most important, this bill would bring millions of people out of the 
shadows and require them to prove their identity, pass a criminal 
background check, and pay all fines and taxes. This would allow 
immigration enforcement to focus on the people who are truly a public 
safety threat.
  So instead of this Senate taking up a bipartisan bill for true 
immigration reform, we have this bill, a bill not likely to go much 
further than this procedural motion which we will face tomorrow.
  This bill on the floor would not have prevented Kate Steinle's tragic 
death. Here is the reality: The vast majority of immigrants are hard-
working, law-abiding individuals with strong family values. I work with 
them, I know them, I trust them, and I believe they have an important 
role to play when it comes to this country's future.
  Many studies have shown that immigrants are less likely to commit 
serious crimes than native-born individuals. This bill unfortunately 
focuses on the violent acts of the few to scapegoat an entire 
community. This is dangerous and irresponsible. This bill continues 
down a dangerous path by promoting the myths that immigrants pose a 
threat to our Nation's safety.
  I urge my colleagues to reject this legislation.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Ohio.
  Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to speak for up to 
15 minutes as in morning business.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection?
  Without objection, it is so ordered.


               Recognizing Hospice of the Western Reserve

  Mr. BROWN. Mr. President, both of my parents spent their final days 
in hospice care. My father passed away a decade and a half ago at the 
age of 89. My mother was in hospice care for a few weeks--seemed to be 
long weeks, but a few weeks--and died at 88 6\1/2\ years ago.
  I saw firsthand how home care workers and hospice workers make a 
difference in someone's final days and the comfort they bring to 
families. During the last moments of my mom's life, people who didn't 
even know her showed incredible care and kindness, and helped to bring 
peace to her, comfort to her, and to our family.
  Last week I visited in my home city of Cleveland. Only a few miles 
away is the hospice Western Reserve, one of the best not-for-profit 
hospices in the entire Midwest. I held a roundtable with a number of 
employees who have made a career of caring for Ohioans reaching the end 
of their lives.
  Western Reserve's core values are: compassion, excellence, quality, 
integrity, service, and stewardship. Each worker there--from social 
workers to cooks to maintenance workers to nurses--embodies these 
traits. They work in what some might assume to be a sad environment. 
Many of the patients they care for die in a matter of days or weeks. 
Each day they encounter not only Ohioans who are near the end of life 
but they spend time with family members who are preparing to grieve for 
a loved one.
  Yet Hospice of the Western Reserve is far from being a depressing 
workplace. The staff is committed to caring for parents and families, 
and they imbue their work--and their patients and their workplace--with 
a fascinating joy of serving others.
  Hospice nursing assistant Audrey Boylan said to me: ``It's an honor 
to be here.'' Laquita Bradford, a dietary server, talked about the 
sense of ``togetherness'' among the staff. She compared it to an 
extended family.
  Workers spoke about other jobs they had elsewhere and all echoed the 
same sentiment: ``It's different here'' at the Hospice of the Western 
Reserve. As I said, it is one of the best not-for-profit hospices in 
the Midwest. Their compassion and commitment has a deep impact on their 
patients and their families and, frankly, on me in my visit.
  One of the social workers, Jennifer Stevens, spoke about how she 
helps families and patients understand where they are in their journey. 
A volunteer, Roz Fabrotta, a longtime teacher and now a volunteer for 
Hospice of the Western Reserve, spoke with passion about her work in 
the bereavement camp that the hospice runs for 6- to 12-year-olds who 
have lost loved ones. There is not any real revenue for that 
bereavement camp. That is what not-for-profit hospices often do.
  Western Reserve's Elisabeth Severance Bereavement Center is funded by 
raising money and is dedicated to helping families through these heart-
wrenching situations. Its staff, for instance, provided counseling to 
families after the senseless shooting at Chardon High School in 
February of 2012, where several students were killed, and their 
practices were used as a model by counselors after the tragic shooting 
at Sandy Hook.
  Through all this work, these men and women maintain a positive 
atmosphere for each other and for those they serve.
  Keli Keyes is a nurse at the hospice. Her coworker and pet, Linus the 
therapy dog, who was with us at our roundtable, is a beautiful golden 
retriever who accompanies her to work each day. All he has to do to 
bring a smile to patients and family members is to snuggle up to them 
or put his nose up to their hands.
  Western Reserve has more than 3,000 volunteers. I think that tells 
you all you need to know about this place--that so many Ohioans are 
willing to take time out of their busy lives to be part of their 
community and to care for their fellow citizens.
  Alvin Fomby, who used to work at Quicken Loans Arena and used to know 
LeBron James, decided he would rather work at the hospice, where he 
could make a real difference in preparing food for families and people 
in hospice care.
  Janet Bildstein, who works at the Hospice of Western Reserve, grew up 
only a few blocks from there and has spent many years working at the 
hospice.
  Joe Tyler, who makes things work, reminded me of my father-in-law, 
who was a maintenance worker at Electric Utility Company in Ashtabula, 
OH, and he could fix anything. He carried a 12-foot wrench around with 
him at the powerplant and he could fix anything. Joe Tyler reminded me 
of that. He said he works under more pressure, which he loves, to fix 
something in a room immediately. If the air-conditioning or the heating 
or the electricity goes out or if something happens to a lamp, he needs 
to take care of these families right away.
  The men and women at this hospice are an inspiration to all of us, 
but they are not alone.


                    Recognizing My Brother's Keeper

  Mr. President, last year President Obama launched the My Brother's 
Keeper challenge to expand opportunities for a group that is far too 
often left behind in this country--African-American boys and young men.
  The President reached out to cities across the country to find people 
committed to ensuring all Americans have access to the opportunities 
they deserve. One of the cities that rose to the occasion is Dayton, 
OH.
  I had the privilege last week of visiting one of America's great 
cities--Dayton--with its mayor, Nan Whaley, a young bright mayor. I 
also visited with Broderick Johnson, who is the chair of the My 
Brother's Keeper Task Force, and works in the White House with the 
President. We held a roundtable with policymakers and activists and 
citizens who had heeded this call to action.
  Dayton already, with Mayor Whaley and others, has a number of 
successful programs in place: Learn to Earn, City of Learners, and 
several mentorship programs. I heard the stories of mentors and their 
mentees, who make a real difference in the lives of so many.
  I met Belmont High School senior Miles Tidd. Miles grew up with a 
single mother and had a tough time early in high school. He wanted to 
drop out. Miles was matched with mentor Quinn Howard. Quinn wouldn't 
let Miles drop out. He was the stable figure in Miles' life, who 
clearly loves him and cares about him, and he pushes him to do better. 
Miles is close to graduating. After 3 years of Junior ROTC, he wants to 
join the Air Force Reserves and to go to the Citadel.
  I met Miles and Quinn at our roundtable at the Dayton Boys 
Preparatory

[[Page 16069]]

Academy. Miles said that ``the best way to make yourself feel better is 
to look outside yourself, and go out of your way to help others.''
  That seemed to be the theme of these young men, ages 15 to 20, who 
had been helped by a mentor. Their goal in life is to now turn around 
and help somebody younger than they are.
  Also at the roundtable was Alexander Worthy, who wore a Dayton ``Live 
With Honor'' T-shirt, referring to the campaign launched by the Dayton 
Community Police Council. The campaign asks Dayton residents to come 
together to combat a culture of violence and rethink what it means to 
live with honor.
  Alexander learned discipline and work ethic from his mentor, Bishop 
Mark McGuire. Bishop McGuire worked with Alexander to help him keep his 
summer job at their church, and Alexander now participates in the 
church's Young Life youth group.
  We also heard from mentor Terry Purdue. Terry is a Dayton native. He 
grew up with a lot of good folks around him, a strong father and 
mother, but still made plenty of mistakes. He now serves as a mentor 
and a police officer on Dayton's West Side. He formed a group called 
the Unit. The Unit holds free work-out classes 3 days a week downtown. 
Thousands have joined the Unit for a class, and at each one he asks 
participants to volunteer to help the Dayton community. The Unit takes 
on a new project each month.
  At one roundtable the mentors and mentees told their stories. One 
middle schooler, James Carr, was, at first, too shy to speak. Finally, 
after seeing other boys speak up, James raised his hand and talked 
about how he picks up trash around his school to keep it clean and 
helps special ed students at school. There is a boy in his class who is 
blind, and he helps him walk to lunch and to the bathroom. James talked 
about wanting to make good grades and most of all, he said, he just 
wants to ``stay normal.''
  Think about that. This child wasn't even in high school yet, and for 
him it is a struggle to stay normal. That is why the work of My 
Brother's Keeper is so important. Mentors can provide a steady 
influence in the lives of children for whom living a stable life--one 
that those of us privileged enough to serve in this body would consider 
``normal''--is a daily struggle.
  Frederick Douglass said that it is ``easier to build strong children 
than repair broken men.'' We need a strategy to allow our children to 
reach their full potential, not one that accepts that an entire segment 
of our citizens will grow up with limited options. It means ending 
disparities in our education system. It means continuing to work to 
reform our criminal justice system. It means working to rebuild the 
broken relationship between police departments in far too many cities 
and the communities they serve. It means taking steps to address the 
employment gap that exists between young men of color and other 
Americans. It means working to end the scourge of gun violence in our 
communities. It means providing those in our society who have made 
mistakes a second chance.
  I encourage all of my colleagues to support the work My Brother's 
Keeper is doing. We also have one in Columbus. We hope to see more of 
those in Ohio. It is up to all of us to ensure that all of our 
children, regardless of their ZIP code or the color of their skin, have 
the opportunity to succeed.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Louisiana.
  Mr. VITTER. Mr. President, I rise today in support of an important 
piece of legislation that I have introduced that would bring an end to 
the dangerous existence of sanctuary cities--the Stop Sanctuary 
Policies and Protect Americans Act.
  The Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 
1996 included language that specifically prohibits State and local 
governments from enacting sanctuary policies. Despite this, cities 
continually violate that provision by having sanctuary policies in 
place. If these cities and localities want to continue to blatantly 
disregard Federal law, they should no longer receive certain Federal 
funds.
  Now, the sanctuary policies that we are talking about fall into two 
categories: one, ordinances that bar city employees from asking about a 
person's immigration status under any circumstances; and two, policies 
that prevent them from reporting a suspected illegal alien to Federal 
immigration law enforcement authorities. These sanctuary policies and 
sanctuary cities that enact them are dangerous and counterproductive to 
both law enforcement efforts and reducing illegal immigration.
  We know there are many instances in which an illegal alien is 
released by local authorities and then commits a very serious crime--
sometimes a murder or a fatal crime. By now we all know of the tragic 
event that renewed our focus on this issue back in July--the murder of 
a 32-year-old woman named Kate Steinle in San Francisco.
  Kate's suspected murderer was an illegal immigrant who had been 
deported 5 times previously and was released this past April by local 
law enforcement, specifically citing San Francisco's sanctuary city 
laws, defying a request by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement 
officials to hold him for deportation proceedings. If this illegal 
immigrant had been held for deportation proceedings instead of being 
set free, Kate Steinle would be alive today--period, end of story.
  Unfortunately, San Francisco is far from the only city in the country 
carrying out this dangerous policy, and Kate Steinle is far from being 
the only victim of a serious crime committed by an illegal immigrant 
under these sorts of circumstances.
  On July 24, 2015, Marilyn Pharis was brutally raped, tortured, and 
murdered in her home in Santa Maria, CA, by an illegal immigrant who 
was released from custody because the county sheriff does not honor 
detainment. Again, this is a clear instance that would be stopped but 
for sanctuary policies.
  On July 27, 2015, an illegal immigrant was arrested and accused of 
killing 60-year-old Margaret Kostelnik in Ravenna Road, OH. Before 
murdering Ms. Kostelnik, the man allegedly attempted to rape a 14-year-
old girl and shoot a woman in a nearby park. The suspect also was 
previously in the custody of law enforcement but was released because 
the Department of Homeland Security refused to issue a detainer and 
take custody of the suspect--a related problem.
  On July 30, a 2-year-old girl was brutally beaten by an illegal 
immigrant in San Luis Obispo County, CA. He was released from local 
custody despite a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement detainer and 
extensive criminal history.
  Other cases include last year, when a Virginia man who killed a 
Catholic nun in a drunk-driving crash was revealed to be an illegal 
alien who had been previously arrested.
  An illegal alien committed a shocking execution-style murder of three 
college students in the sanctuary city of Newark, NJ, several years 
ago. He had been arrested twice before this grizzly crime. In the 
aftermath of the murders, the attorney general of New Jersey 
effectively eliminated Newark's sanctuary city policy.
  Now, according to documents uncovered by a Freedom of Information Act 
request by the Center for Immigration Studies, ICE lists at least 340 
cities defying Federal law, providing safe haven to illegal immigrants, 
including my original hometown of New Orleans. These policies, again, 
are a direct infringement of Federal law, and it is simply 
unacceptable.
  Worse still, these cities are actively releasing criminal illegal 
immigrants back into our communities instead of working cooperatively 
with Federal officials to deport them or lock them up. I firmly believe 
it is time to reverse these illegal policies, to bar them once and for 
good. That is why I have joined on this crucial piece of legislation 
with Senators Toomey, Grassley, Cruz, Johnson, Cornyn, Sullivan, 
Perdue, Isakson, Rubio, Barrasso, and Thune. We are introducing this 
legislation and we are getting a vote tomorrow to end the practice of 
sanctuary cities violating existing Federal immigration law.

[[Page 16070]]

  This legislation takes a commonsense approach to this problem, and 
there are three key parts to the bill.
  First, this bill changes the incentives for cities by creating 
penalties for States, local governments, and law enforcement entities 
that choose to have these policies in place. These penalties come in 
the form of the removal of certain streams of Federal funding for 
sanctuary jurisdictions, and the penalties apply to whatever government 
entity is actually making that bad decision.
  In cases where a law enforcement entity, such as a jail or a police 
department, has a policy or practice that refuses to comply with 
Federal immigration law, it will be prevented from receiving community-
oriented policing services grants or State Criminal Alien Assistance 
Program grants. So that entity directly will be penalized; it is making 
the bad decision. On the other hand, if a State or city council or 
executive passes a resolution or implements a policy or practice that 
refuses to comply with Federal immigration law, then that city or 
entity will no longer be available for community development block 
grant funds.
  Again, we penalize the specific entity or public official involved. 
It is important that Federal funds are withheld from the entity that 
makes the dangerous decision to allow dangerous illegal immigrants to 
walk free rather than turning them over to the Department of Homeland 
Security.
  Second, we have seen the willingness of jurisdictions to comply with 
immigration detainers decrease in recent years due to litigation 
pursued by the ACLU. We know dozens of jurisdictions that want to 
cooperate and were cooperating but became sanctuary cities in reaction 
to these lawsuits. Our legislation deals with this threat head-on and 
grants local law enforcement the clear authority to always comply with 
ICE detainers. However, it is important to note that we have been very 
careful to protect individual rights and have preserved an individual's 
right to sue for a violation of their civil or constitutional rights. 
But if the problem was with the detainer, then individuals sue ICE and 
not the local law enforcement officials.
  The third and final part of this legislation deals directly with 
those who continue to cross our border illegally, and it establishes 
Kate's Law--appropriately named after Kathryn Steinle, whom I mentioned 
earlier. Kate's Law increases mandatory minimum sentence requirements 
for people who continue to cross the border illegally. Kate's Law will 
increase the maximum penalty for illegal reentry from 2 years to 5 
years. It also creates a maximum penalty of 10 years for illegal 
immigrants who have been denied admission, excluded, deported, or 
removed three or more times and then illegally reenter the country.
  In order to ensure appropriate treatment of criminal illegal 
immigrants, Kate's Law creates a mandatory minimum sentence of 5 years 
for any illegal immigrant who illegally reenters the country and has 
been convicted of an aggravated felony prior to removal or has been 
previously convicted twice of illegal reentry. Right now, there are 
nearly 170,000 convicted criminal aliens who have been ordered deported 
but remain at large in our country. This is a direct result of 
nonenforcement policies and failed leadership.
  Last year, ICE responded to a request, disclosing that it released 
169 convicted illegals from over 130 ZIP Codes in 2013. At least two of 
the ZIP Codes mentioned are in Louisiana--Kenner and Baton Rouge--and 
dangerous criminals were released through the South Louisiana Detention 
Center. This year alone, ICE reported releasing 30,558 unique criminal 
illegal immigrants from their custody. Some of the crimes committed by 
these criminal aliens include arson, assault, burglary, kidnapping, 
larceny, robbery, sexual assault, drunk driving, weapons offenses, and 
20 other serious crimes. Why would we ever want to provide safe harbor 
to these people? That is what sanctuary cities are doing.
  This legislation is supported by a wide range of organizations to 
crack down on this problem: the Remembrance Project, NumbersUSA, 
Federation for American Immigration Reform, the Federal Law Enforcement 
Officers Association, the International Union of Police Associations, 
AFL-CIO, the National Association of Police Organizations, the National 
Sheriffs' Association, America First Latinos, and letters from the 
McCann, Rosenberg, Ronnebeck, Oliver, and Wilkerson families, all of 
whom tragically had family members murdered by illegal aliens.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Record 
letters of support.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                                                    NumbersUSA

                                  Arlington, VA, October 14, 2015.
     Hon. David Vitter,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Vitter: As President of NumbersUSA, a non-
     partisan activist network of more than 3 million citizens, I 
     am writing to express our support for the Stop Sanctuary 
     Policies and Protect Americans Act.
       Following the murder of Kate Steinle, the American people 
     became acutely aware that while many States and localities 
     blatantly violate Federal law and release criminal aliens 
     onto their streets, the Federal government does absolutely 
     nothing to stop them. Kate's death was far from the first 
     instance of a murder by a criminal alien that could have been 
     prevented, and more lives will be lost until Congress finally 
     acts. We believe that this piece of legislation, S. 2146, is 
     an appropriate and much needed first step.
       According to Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), 
     there are currently 340 ``sanctuary jurisdictions'' in the 
     United States. Over a 9-month period last year, these 
     jurisdictions released 9,295 aliens that ICE was seeking to 
     deport. It is unconscionable that Congress would continue to 
     provide taxpayer money to these jurisdictions and subsidize 
     their willful disregard of the law and public safety.
       The Stop Sanctuary Policies and Protect Americans Act first 
     restricts funding from the State Criminal Alien Assistance 
     Program (SCAAP), from Community Oriented Policing Services 
     (COPS), and from Community Development Block Grants (CDBG) 
     for sanctuary jurisdictions. It reallocates those funds to 
     jurisdictions that cooperate with ICE. The bill also requires 
     the Department of Homeland Security (OHS) to publicly post a 
     list of sanctuary jurisdictions online, including the number 
     of ICE detainers ignored by each jurisdiction. These 
     provisions would appropriately punish sanctuary 
     jurisdictions, encourage further compliance with the law, 
     reward those jurisdictions already in compliance, and ensure 
     that the public knows where their local governments stand.
       Another critical element of this legislation is that it 
     protects local officers while they carry out ICE detainers, 
     clarifying that they are acting as agents of ICE with all of 
     the necessary authority and protection from liability granted 
     to a Federal law enforcement officer. No law enforcement 
     officer should fear retribution for following the law.
       Finally, this bill increases the maximum penalties for 
     aliens who illegally reenter the country following denial of 
     admission, exclusion, deportation, or removal, and creates a 
     mandatory minimum sentence for those who are convicted of an 
     aggravated felony or two instances of illegal reentry, all of 
     which would help protect the public from criminal aliens.
       NumbersUSA applauds your leadership on this issue and 
     stands eager to assist you in advancing the Stop Sanctuary 
     Policies and Protect Americans Act.
           Sincerely,
                                                         Roy Beck,
     President and Founder, NumbersUSA.
                                  ____

                                           Federation for American


                                           Immigration Reform,

                                                 October 19, 2015.
     Hon. David Vitter,
     U.S. Senate,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Vitter: I am writing to thank you for your 
     efforts as a United States Senator to end ``sanctuary 
     cities''--State and local jurisdictions with policies that 
     obstruct immigration enforcement and compromise public 
     safety.
       Your bill, the Stop Sanctuary Polices and Protect Americans 
     Act (S. 2146), is a commonsense measure that denies certain 
     federal grants to jurisdictions that obstruct efforts by the 
     Department of Homeland Security to identify and remove 
     illegal aliens, including criminal aliens. Jurisdictions that 
     interfere with immigration enforcement should not benefit 
     from federal funds. Additionally, your bill increases 
     penalties for illegal reentry and sends a message that we 
     take the enforcement of the nation's immigration laws 
     seriously.
       The tragic death of Kate Steinle over the summer in the 
     sanctuary city of San Francisco illustrates the necessity of 
     your bill. As you know, the suspect, Francisco Sanchez, was 
     in San Francisco law enforcement custody but was released him 
     back onto the

[[Page 16071]]

     streets--ignoring an ICE detainer request in the process--
     because of the sanctuary policy. Ms. Steinle's death was 
     preventable and the public expects the U.S. Congress to hold 
     these jurisdictions accountable.
       Tuesday's vote on your bill is straightforward. A vote for 
     S. 2146 shows that Senators want to protect law-abiding 
     citizens. A vote against S. 2146 means they want to protect 
     criminal aliens--individuals who not only violate our 
     immigration laws but our criminal laws as well. I trust that 
     the Stop Sanctuary Policies and Protect Americans Act will 
     enjoy broad bipartisan support.
           Sincerely,
                                                        Dan Stein,
     President.
                                  ____


  [From the Federation for American Immigration Reform Press Release, 
                             Oct. 15, 2015]

   FAIR Urges Senate To Pass the Stop Sanctuary Policies and Protect 
                        Americans Act (S. 2146)

       Washington, D.C.--The Federation for American Immigration 
     Reform (FAIR) is urging the U.S. Senate to act swiftly to 
     pass S. 2146, the Stop Sanctuary Policies and Protect 
     Americans Act. The bill would cutoff certain federal grants 
     to jurisdictions that defy federal immigration laws and 
     refuse to honor requests to detain illegal aliens who are 
     sought by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). There 
     are currently some 300 jurisdictions that harbor illegal 
     aliens.
       ``Policies that protect people who are breaking U.S. 
     immigration laws, including criminal aliens who have been 
     arrested for other offenses, jeopardize the lives and safety 
     of Americans. They also violate federal law. It is essential 
     that Congress act immediately to end these policies,'' 
     declared Dan Stein, president of FAIR.
       The House of Representatives already passed legislation in 
     July to cut off federal funds to sanctuary jurisdictions. 
     While the Senate has delayed action, Americans continue to be 
     victimized by state and local policies that result in 
     deportable criminals being returned to our streets.
       S. 2146 would take concrete steps to rein in local 
     jurisdictions that impede immigration enforcement. The bill:
       --Creates a uniform national definition of what constitutes 
     a ``sanctuary jurisdiction.''
       --Denies SCAAP, COPS and HUD grants to sanctuary 
     jurisdictions and redirects those funds to compliant 
     jurisdictions.
       --Increases penalties against illegal aliens who reenter 
     the country after deportation.
       --Protects individuals who are victims of crimes, or who 
     provide information to police. Such individuals cannot be 
     asked about immigration status or have their immigration 
     status investigated.
       ``The Stop Sanctuary Policies and Protect Americans Act is 
     commonsense legislation designed to deter local government 
     officials that actively shield illegal aliens from being 
     removed from the United States,'' Stein said. ``Jurisdictions 
     that thwart even the minimal immigration law enforcement 
     being carried out by the Obama administration should not 
     expect to be the beneficiaries of federal law enforcement 
     grants.
       ``FAIR urges the Senate to act responsibly to protect the 
     safety of the American public by approving S. 2146 and to 
     work with the House to send a final bill to the president's 
     desk. If President Obama decides to veto the bill it is up to 
     him to explain to the American people why he is refusing to 
     act against reckless policies that have resulted in needless 
     deaths of innocent citizens,'' concluded Stein.


                               ABOUT FAIR

       Founded in 1979, FAIR is the country's largest immigration 
     reform group. With more than 250,000 members nationwide, FAIR 
     fights for immigration policies that serve national 
     interests, not special interests. FAIR believes that 
     immigration reform must enhance national security, improve 
     the economy, protect jobs, preserve our environment, and 
     establish a rule of law that is recognized and enforced.


     
                                  ____
                           [October 16, 2015]

                 Analysis of Senate Anti-Sanctuary Bill


Bill seeks to bring safety to communities and encourage enforcement of 
                              federal law

       Washington, DC.--The Center for Immigration Studies has 
     published an analysis of Senate Bill 2146, the ``Stop 
     Sanctuary Policies and Protect American Act'' introduced by 
     Senator David Vitter. This sanctuary legislation is designed 
     to block state or local governments from enacting or 
     continuing sanctuary laws or policies that protect aliens 
     from the reach of federal immigration authorities, most 
     especially with regard to aliens arrested and convicted for 
     criminal offenses.
       Recent data reveals an estimated 1,000 criminal aliens a 
     month are being released due to sanctuary policies, making 
     congressional action imperative. The bill seeks to 
     incentivize state and local governments to cooperate with 
     federal authorities by continuing existing grants to those 
     which exchange information and comply with detainers; cutting 
     federal funding to sanctuary governments which refuse to 
     cooperate, that is then distributed to jurisdictions that do 
     cooperate; and by providing immunity to officers when 
     engaging in cooperative efforts, including complying with 
     detainers or providing information.
       View the entire report at: http://cis.org/Analysis-of-
S2146-the-Stop-Sanctuary-Policies-and-Protect-Americans-Act
       ``The Obama administration refuses to deal with the 
     sanctuary problem, which has led to crimes such as the murder 
     of Kate Steinle by a five-times-deported illegal-alien 
     felon,'' said Dan Cadman, a Center fellow and author of the 
     report. ``This bill addresses the sanctuary policies which 
     result in thousands of criminal aliens being released into 
     our communities to reoffend. Unfortunately, it is not as 
     comprehensive as the Davis-Oliver Act, which would deal with 
     the sanctuary policies and the administration's deliberate 
     suppression of enforcement.''
                                  ____

                                                 October 16, 2015.
     Re Support of ``Stop Sanctuary Policies and Protect Americans 
         Act''

     Hon. David Vitter,
     Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.
     Hon. Chuck Grassley,
     Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.
     Hon. Ron Johnson,
     Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.
     Hon. Ted Cruz,
     Russell Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.
     Hon. Pat Toomey,
     Russell Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.
       Dear Senators: My name is Brian McCann and I testified at 
     the Senate Judiciary Committee on behalf of the McCann family 
     and all Americans on July 21, 2015. You will recall the 
     tragic death of my brother Dennis was outlined in my remarks 
     and official witness document. I have read the measure you 
     are sponsoring and I offer my complete support. I have tried 
     to amend the cruel and unsafe ordinance passed in Cook County 
     without success due to the peculiar nature of Illinois and 
     Cook County politics. I remain convinced that your approach 
     to limit grants to sanctuary jurisdictions to include SCAAP, 
     CDBG and COPS will be an effective lever to improve safety to 
     these over 300 sanctuary jurisdictions. Moreover, your 
     language relative to Kate's law also has our support.
       I will listen to the debates next Tuesday and will begin my 
     day with a prayer for the thousands of family victims 
     suffering daily because of these sanctuary jurisdictions. I 
     remain ready and willing to help in these matters and please 
     do not hesitate to call or write.
           Sincerely,
     Brian McCann.
                                  ____

                                                 October 15, 2015.
     Subject: Support of ``Stop Sanctuary Policies and Protect 
         Americans Act''

     Hon. David Vitter,
     Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.
     Hon. Chuck Grassley,
     Chairman, Committee on the Judiciary, Hart Senate Office 
         Building, Washington, DC.
     Hon. Ron Johnson,
     Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.
     Hon. Ted Cruz,
     Russell Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.
     Hon. Pat Toomey,
     Russell Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.
       Dear Senators: On behalf of my son killed by an illegal 
     alien in San Francisco almost
     5 years ago I want to thank you for introducing and advancing 
     the Stop Sanctuary Policies and Protect Americans Act. This 
     legislation that will address the reentry of illegal aliens, 
     restrict federal funding of cities that operate as 
     ``sanctuary cities'', and also support and protect our law 
     enforcement officers is long overdue.
       Quite frankly it is hard to believe that in a nation 
     founded on the rule of law this legislation is even 
     necessary. Since my son's death at least 25,000 people have 
     been killed by illegal aliens. Many have been killed by 
     illegal aliens who have been deported multiple times. Many 
     have been killed by illegal aliens who are actually living 
     and being protected by sanctuary cities.
       There are over 135,000 convicted illegal alien criminals 
     currently roaming our streets. That number is growing by 
     1,000 every week as so many of our cities are refusing to 
     honor detainers resulting in convicted illegal alien felons 
     first to be released into the general population and then 
     being protected by sanctuary cities. How many more Americans 
     have to die before our ``leaders'' put the safety of our 
     citizens above votes and cheap labor?
       Nothing I can do will bring my son back to life. But I ask 
     you to do all that is possible to make sure no other American 
     family has to suffer the real separation of families and the 
     never ending nightmare of losing a loved one. I wonder every 
     day why our government has betrayed us and cares more about 
     illegal aliens than law abiding American citizens.
           Sincerely,
                                                    Don Rosenberg,
                                                           Victim.

[[Page 16072]]

     
                                  ____
                                                 October 16, 2015.
     Subject: Support of ``Stop Sanctuary Cities and Protect 
         Americans Act''

     Hon. David Vitter,
     Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.
     Hon. Chuck Grassley,
     Chairman, Committee on the Judiciary,
     Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.
     Hon. Ron Johnson,
     Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.
     Hon. Ted Cruz,
     Russell Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.
     Hon. Pat Toomey,
     Russell Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.
       Dear Senators: On Behalf of the Ronnebeck Family, in memory 
     of our beloved family member Grant Ronnebeck, I thank you for 
     introducing and advancing the Stop Sanctuary Cities and 
     Protect Americans Act. We support this legislation that will 
     address the reentry of illegal aliens, restrict federal 
     funding of cities that operate as ``Sanctuary Cities'', and 
     that also supports and protects our law enforcement officers.
       You might remember my testimony before the Judicial 
     Committee in July 2015, relating how my nephew Grant was 
     killed. He was working at his job when an illegal alien shot 
     him in the face, killing him, seemingly doing nothing more 
     than counting his change too slowly. You also heard the 
     compelling stories of Susan Oliver, Jim Steinle, Laura 
     Wilkerson, and Dennis McCann. We have all lost family members 
     due to illegal aliens.
       Unfortunately, since that hearing, several more Americans 
     have been murdered at the hands of illegal aliens drawn to 
     sanctuary cities. Those include Margaret Kostelnik of Lake 
     County Ohio, and Marilyn Pharias of Santa Maria, California. 
     In fact, the Government Accountability Office data shows that 
     illegal aliens are committing murders of Americans at the 
     rate of over 5,000 per year. Sanctuary cities can only create 
     an incentive for illegal aliens to enter our Country, and 
     stay with impunity from deportation. The Stop Sanctuary 
     Cities and Protect Americans Act will help save American 
     Lives, and send a message to all Americans that we are your 
     priority.
       I ask each of you to do everything in your power to pass 
     this important legislation, for Grant, Kate, Josh, Brian, 
     Margaret, Maria, and the thousands of others who have lost 
     their lives due to this issue.
           Sincerely,
     Michael Ronnebeck.
                                  ____

     Senate Judiciary Committee,
     U.S. Senate,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Committee Members: The legislation addressing 
     sanctuary cities and Kate's law are of paramount interest to 
     me because I am a widow of a law enforcement officer killed 
     by an illegal immigrant previously deported several times for 
     other felonious acts. This issue has directly affected my 
     life and the lives of my children.
       I am primarily concerned about violent illegal immigrants 
     being allowed to return to our country with little 
     consequence. Every single day, law officers are forced to 
     release criminal aliens who pose a threat to community 
     safety--in violation of current laws that require 
     deportation. Additionally ICE released back onto the streets 
     76,000 convicted criminal aliens in the last few years. 
     Currently there are over 150,000 criminal aliens at large in 
     the United States who have criminal convictions and were 
     formally and lawfully ordered to be deported. The 
     Administration's tolerance of sanctuary cities has also 
     resulted in more arrested aliens being released by local law 
     agencies. And, more than 120 of the criminal aliens who've 
     been ordered deported in the last few years were released by 
     ICE have now been charged with additional homicide offenses. 
     The man that killed my husband, Deputy Danny Oliver, was 
     deported several times for various felonies. However, due to 
     the lack of coordination between law enforcement agencies, 
     his killer was allowed back into this country.
       I have read reports of various positions on these matters, 
     and I realize that not all fully support the changes. 
     Therefore, I am asking for only one thing. I do not want your 
     sympathy, I want change so others will not have to endure the 
     grief we have in our lives every day.
       Thank you for your consideration of my viewpoint on this 
     matter. I believe it is an important issue, and would like to 
     see the legislation passed to ensure felons are not allowed 
     to continue to commit serious felonies such as homicide.
           Sincerely,
                                                  Susan T. Oliver,
     Widow of Deputy Danny P. Oliver.
                                  ____

                                                 October 18, 2015.
     Re Support of ``Stop Sanctuary Policies and Protect Americans 
         Act''

     Hon. David Vitter,
     Washington, DC.
     Hon. Chuck Grassley,
     Chairman, Committee on the Judiciary,
     Washington, DC.
     Hon. Ron Johnson,
     Washington, DC.
     Hon. Ted Cruz,
     Washington, DC.
     Hon. Pat Toomey,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senators: On behalf on Joshua Wilkerson, I want to 
     send my support of ``Stop Sanctuary Policies and Protect 
     Americans Act.
       On November 16th, 2010, Joshua was brutally murdered and 
     then his body was set on Fire. Per the Medical Examiner it 
     was torture. He was murdered by an Illegal Alien, Hermilo 
     Moralez, brought to this country by his Illegal Alien 
     Parents, when he was 10 years old. He came to America from 
     Belize. Our Family has been crushed, overwhelmed, lost, and 
     irretrievably broken. As a mother I assure you there is 
     nothing like the pain of what I have been through.
       This is just ``my'' story. There are so many families in 
     every state in America that have suffered loss of life just 
     as we have. Sanctuary City Policies invite the criminal 
     element of Illegals to that City.
       I want to say Thank you for bringing this key legislation, 
     that will be beneficial to all American Families.
       Sincerely,
                                                  Laura Wilkerson.

  Mr. VITTER. Mr. President, in closing, I refuse to simply stand by 
and reward jurisdictions around the country with Federal funding, with 
taxpayer funds, when they are in clear violation of the law and are 
actively making our communities more dangerous rather than safer. I 
have offered similar versions of this legislation many times in the 
past. We cannot wait any longer to tackle this problem head-on.
  While President Obama continues to let the world know he will not be 
enforcing the current immigration laws or taking action against these 
jurisdictions, we here in Congress have an absolute duty to act 
otherwise. I believe this legislation will absolutely benefit all 
Americans by keeping us safe here at home. I strongly urge all of our 
colleagues to support it in votes tomorrow on the Senate floor.
  Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Lankford). The clerk will call the roll.
  The senior assistant legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, tomorrow we are going to be voting on a 
very important bill. We will have the opportunity to vote to proceed to 
a bill that deals with sanctuary cities and immigration policies that 
are a serious threat to the public safety. We will move to take up the 
Stop Sanctuary Policies and Protect Americans Act--a bill that should 
put an end to sanctuary jurisdictions, give law enforcement important 
tools they need to detain criminals, and increase penalties for 
dangerous and repeat offenders of our immigration laws.
  Some of these sanctuary policies are created when a local government 
unit, such as a city or county executive body, passes an ordinance 
prohibiting their officers from communicating with Federal immigration 
and law enforcement officials. Now, there is another way: Some 
sanctuary policies come about simply because local law enforcement 
initiates its own policies of providing safe harbor for undocumented 
immigrants. And then another way: Some sanctuary policies develop 
because law enforcement officers are afraid they will be sued if they 
enforce immigration laws and detain an individual for their unlawful 
immigration status.
  In summation, these policies and practices have allowed thousands of 
dangerous criminals to be released back into the community, and the 
effects have been disastrous. I am going to speak about those effects. 
America saw these policies play out in July when Kate Steinle was 
innocently killed while walking along a San Francisco pier with her 
father. The murderer, who was illegally in the country and actually 
deported five times prior to that day, was released into the community 
by a sanctuary jurisdiction that did not honor the detainer issued by 
Immigration and Customs Enforcement. The suspect in Kate's death 
admitted he was in San Francisco because of its sanctuary policies. 
That sums up the problem our bill addresses.
  Here is Kate--no longer with us--as one example. I have several other 
examples because people tried to tell us

[[Page 16073]]

you should not change policy based upon one murder. Maybe so, maybe 
not, but 5 years of statistics shows about 121 people killed by people 
that have been deported for criminal activities in this country and 
then come back in. I want to tell you what our bill does about that, 
but I want to first tell you about some examples.
  In July, our Senate Judiciary Committee held a hearing called 
``Oversight of the Administration's Misdirected Immigration Enforcement 
Policies: Examining the Impact on Public Safety and Honoring the 
Victims.'' That is the committee's hearing title. This hearing was an 
opportunity to hear the voices of Americans who have been impacted by 
these very indefensible policies while also conducting oversight of the 
administration's policies and tolerance toward sanctuary jurisdictions.
  Jim Steinle, Kate's father, expressed his family's desire to see 
legislation enacted to take undocumented felons off our streets. The 
committee was very moved by his presence and testimony--obviously 
something that wasn't very easy for him. He talked about how Kate ``had 
a special soul, a kind and giving heart, the most contagious laugh, and 
a smile that would light up a room.'' He told us how she died in his 
arms that day, despite her plea in her dying words of ``Help me, Dad.'' 
The suspect in Kate Steinle's murder had seven prior felony convictions 
and had been deported five times. Yet he was shielded--protected, in 
other words--by San Francisco's sanctuary policy.
  The Kate Steinle story is not a singular case. Too many Americans 
have lost their lives, and too many families have had to feel the real 
and devastating impact caused by sanctuary cities and lax enforcement 
policies.
  Our committee heard powerful testimony from families other than Kate 
Steinle's father. We heard from Mrs. Susan Oliver. She is the widow of 
Deputy Danny Oliver. This is the family. He was a police officer in 
Sacramento, CA. Danny was killed while on duty by an illegal immigrant 
who was previously arrested on two separate occasions for drug-related 
charges and twice deported. Mrs. Oliver spoke of the daily loss she 
experiences without her husband in everything from raising her children 
to the milestones he will miss, including their daughter's upcoming 
wedding.
  We also heard from Michael Ronnebeck, the uncle of Grant Ronnebeck. 
You are seeing Grant's picture here. Grant was a 21-year-old 
convenience store clerk who was gunned down earlier this year by an 
undocumented immigrant. The Obama administration released Grant's 
alleged murderer, who was in removal proceedings. Grant was born in my 
State of Iowa but resided in Arizona. He had two brothers and a sister. 
Mr. Ronnebeck expressed his family's desire to see Grant's legacy be a 
force for change, imploring us as lawmakers to ``rise above political 
differences, to set aside personal interests, and to use your resources 
to make sensible immigration reform a reality in the coming months, 
with the safety and security of American citizens first and foremost in 
mind.'' Think of that tomorrow and think of the Ronnebeck family losing 
their son. They are asking us to keep the safety and security of 
American citizens first and foremost in our minds.
  We also heard from Brian McCann. Mr. McCann's brother, Dennis McCann, 
was killed in 2011 by a drunk driver who was in the country illegally 
and driving without a license. U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement 
had placed a detainer on the drunk driver, but he was released under 
Cook County, IL, sanctuary city policies. Mr. McCann expressed his 
anger at the sanctuary city policies of Cook County, which allowed his 
brother's killer to be free, and at a system that failed to communicate 
with him and his family when the suspect was released by the locals.
  We also heard from Laura Wilkerson of Pearland, TX, the mother of 
Josh Wilkerson. Josh was 18 years old when he was murdered by his high 
school classmate, an undocumented immigrant, after Josh offered him a 
ride home from school. Josh's murderer was sentenced to life in prison 
and will be eligible for parole in 30 years. Mrs. Wilkerson spoke of 
the gentle soul of her son, the brutal torture that he endured, and 
actually watching an unapologetic 19-year-old brag about his killing 
skills during trial and talking about how things were done in his 
country.
  These stories are heartbreaking, but nothing has changed. I want to 
talk about what has happened since Kate's murder. We have seen more 
fall victim to sanctuary jurisdiction policies.
  Shortly after Kate's death, Marilyn Pharis was brutally raped, 
tortured, and murdered in her home in Santa Maria, CA, by an 
undocumented immigrant who was released from custody because the county 
sheriff does not honor Federal enforcement detainers.
  A 2-year-old girl was brutally beaten by an undocumented immigrant in 
San Luis Obispo County, CA. He was released from local custody despite 
a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement detainer and an extensive 
criminal history, and he is still at large.
  Margaret Kostelnik was killed by an undocumented immigrant who 
allegedly attempted to rape a 14-year-old girl and shoot a woman in a 
nearby park. He was released because Immigration and Customs 
Enforcement refused to issue a detainer and take custody of that 
suspect.
  These are a very few of the stories that could be told on this Senate 
floor. There are many more families who are hurting today because of 
lax immigration policies and the lack of willingness by President 
Obama's administration to do something about sanctuary cities.
  But don't take it from just me. Even the Secretary of Homeland 
Security acknowledges that sanctuary cities are ``counterproductive to 
public safety.'' He said these policies were ``unacceptable.'' Yet this 
administration has not taken demonstrable action to address the 
unwillingness of sanctuary jurisdictions to work with Federal 
immigration authorities. More than 12,000 Federal detainer requests 
were ignored by State and local jurisdictions in 2014.
  Moreover, in June of this year, the administration rolled out a new 
program that reduces the enforcement priorities and announced it would 
not seek the custody of many criminals who are in the country 
illegally. This is called the Priority Enforcement Program, PEP for 
short. That program actually gives sanctuary jurisdictions permission 
to continue ignoring Immigration and Customs Enforcement detainers. PEP 
even discourages compliant jurisdictions from further cooperation with 
Immigration and Customs Enforcement because it now only issues 
detainers for individuals who are already convicted of certain crimes 
deemed priorities by the Department of Homeland Security.
  Many local jurisdictions want to work with the Federal Government and 
protect their communities but are frustrated when the administration 
refuses to work with them. Think of Arizona trying to protect its own 
citizens from the crimes committed by undocumented immigrants in that 
State. The State legislature passes laws. The administration goes to 
court and gets those laws declared contrary to the Constitution or our 
only immigration laws. Why? Because under the Constitution, one of the 
18 powers of Congress happens to be the enforcement or the writing of 
the immigration laws so they are uniform. So when this administration 
will not enforce immigration laws in Arizona, and Arizona decides under 
the Tenth Amendment, under the police powers of the State, to do it for 
the Federal Government, then it is wrong for that State to do it. But 
this administration will not take action against the sanctuary cities 
that are violating the same immigration laws.
  I want to continue with some examples where the administration 
refuses to work with local officials. Sheriff Cummings in Cape Cod, MA, 
recently explained his frustration with Immigration and Customs 
Enforcement when an immigrant who had overstayed his visa was arrested 
for battery with a dangerous weapon and child pornography. Sheriff 
Cummings said that

[[Page 16074]]

when he learned that this individual who had a long criminal history 
was in the country illegally, he asked Immigration and Customs 
Enforcement for a Federal immigration detainer ``so that if someone 
came up with a bail we could then turn him over to ICE and we wouldn't 
release him back into the community.'' So then what happened? ICE--
Immigration and Customs Enforcement--never issued the detainer.
  Sheriff Cummings noted that before PEP, immigration authorities would 
issue a detainer pretty quickly but not anymore. He commented:

       It just shows how they've relaxed their policy so there are 
     more criminal illegal aliens in our communities right now. 
     Those are the ones I'm concerned with. I'm concerned with the 
     individuals that have committed crimes. They are here 
     illegally to begin with and they've committed crimes while 
     they're here. To me it makes no sense to allow these people 
     to stay in our communities.

  I very much agree. It makes no sense that people who do not belong 
here and commit crimes are allowed to return to our communities and 
cause further harm.
  Getting back to the bill we will be voting on tomorrow, the Stop 
Sanctuary Policies and Protect America Act addresses the problem of 
sanctuary jurisdictions in a very commonsense and balanced way. There 
seems to be consensus that sanctuary jurisdictions should be held 
accountable, and we do that with the power of the purse. And now I am 
beginning to explain our bill.
  This bill limits the availability of certain Federal grants to cities 
and States that have sanctuary policies. We limit funding through the 
State Criminal Alien Assistance Program. This is a grant program run by 
the Department of Justice that is designed to reimburse part of the 
cost incurred by local jurisdictions that detain undocumented criminal 
aliens. Sanctuary cities receive these funds despite their refusal to 
detain suspects who are wanted by immigration authorities.
  In this year alone, California received a total of $44 million in 
these State Criminal Alien Assistance Program funds even though the 
State has a sanctuary law. New York City, a sanctuary city, received 
$11.6 million in taxpayer funding. To fund sanctuary cities with State 
Criminal Alien Assistance Program money essentially subsidizes these 
jurisdictions for their lack of cooperation.
  As Former Assistant Secretary Morton stated in a letter to Cook 
County, a well-known sanctuary city, ``It is fundamentally inconsistent 
for Cook County to request federal reimbursement for the cost of 
detaining aliens who commit or are charged with crimes while at the 
same time thwarting ICE's efforts to remove those very same aliens from 
the United States.''
  The bill that will be before us tomorrow morning when we vote 
responds to this hypocrisy by making sanctuary jurisdictions ineligible 
for the State Criminal Alien Assistance Program. Another grant program 
limited to sanctuary jurisdictions is the community-oriented policing 
services or, as it is known around this town and locally, the COPS 
Program. These grant dollars help fund community-oriented policing 
programs for local law enforcement agencies. Our bill makes sanctuary 
jurisdictions ineligible for these taxpayer dollars if they have a 
policy or practice in place despite the lack of any statute, ordinance, 
or policy directive from their unit of local government. Finally, the 
bill limits taxpayer dollars through the community development block 
grant for sanctuary jurisdictions when a county, city, or State has in 
effect a statute that clearly defies information sharing as required by 
Federal law or has a statute that prohibits any government official 
from complying with a detainer request issued by the Department of 
Homeland Security. Those are the funding parts of our bill.
  In acknowledgement of the bill's fairness in targeting certain 
grants, the National Sheriffs' Association writes:

       The grant penalties you would impose also acknowledge that 
     our public safety entities should not be punished for the 
     actions of a state or local subdivision over which they may 
     not have control. I appreciate the careful consideration you 
     clearly gave that issue.

  The second part of the bill deals with lawsuits that local law 
enforcement people might be faced with, so the second thing our bill 
does is provide protection for law enforcement officers who do want to 
cooperate and comply with detainer requests from the Federal 
Government. It would address the liability issue created by recent 
court decisions by providing liability protection to local law 
enforcement who honor Immigration and Customs Enforcement detainers.
  The Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association explains in a letter 
of support for the bill:

       Unfortunately, at least four courts have ruled that local 
     law enforcement officers may be sued for violating the Fourth 
     Amendment if they comply with an immigration detainer, even 
     if the detainer was lawfully issued and the detention would 
     have been legal if carried out by DHS. This means that our 
     local counterparts are exposed to potential civil liability 
     and it disables their ability to detain dangerous criminals 
     scheduled for release. The Stop Sanctuary Policies and 
     Protect Americans Act solves this problem by explicitly 
     stating that local law enforcement officers have legal 
     authority to comply with immigration detainers.

  While preventing restrictive liability to law enforcement, the bill 
also ensures the protection of civil liberties and the rights of 
individuals. The Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association noted 
that ``the bill protects civil liberties, ensuring that someone who has 
had their constitutional rights violated may sue.''
  Finally, the bill addresses criminals attempting to reenter the 
United States and habitual offenders of our immigration laws. The bill 
creates a mandatory minimum sentence of 5 years for any alien who is an 
aggravated felon or has been twice convicted of illegal reentry. Thanks 
to many people, including TV's Bill O'Reilly, for keeping this issue 
constantly before the people of this country. This part of the bill--
named by Bill O'Reilly and commonly referred to as Kate's law--has 
become so important to many Americans. You can only imagine how 
important it is to the families of those who were killed by these 
murderers, the people whose pictures I had up here. This bill is very 
important to those families. Kate's Law is necessary in order to take 
those who are dangerous to our communities and have no respect for our 
law off our streets.
  This bill has broad support from law enforcement groups. It also has 
the support of groups who want enforcement of our immigration laws. It 
has the support of the Remembrance Project, a group devoted to honoring 
and remembering Americans who have been killed by undocumented 
immigrants.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that letters of support be 
printed in the Record.
   There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                                      The Remembrance Project,

                                    Houston, TX, October 14, 2015.
     Subject: Support of ``Stop Sanctuary Policies and Protect 
         Americans Act''

     Hon. David Vitter,
     Hart Senate Office Building,
     Washington, DC.
     Hon. Chuck Grassley,
     Chairman, Committee on the Judiciary,
     Hart Senate Office Building,
     Washington, DC.
     Hon. Ron Johnson,
     Hart Senate Office Building,
     Washington, DC.
     Hon. Ted Cruz,
     Russell Senate Office Building,
     Washington, DC.
     Hon. Pat Toomey,
     Russell Senate Office Building,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senators: On behalf of Americans killed by illegal 
     aliens, and their surviving families, I thank you for 
     introducing and advancing the Stop Sanctuary Policies and 
     Protect Americans Act. We support this legislation that will 
     address the reentry of illegal aliens, restrict federal 
     funding of cities that operate as ``sanctuary cities'', and 
     that also supports and protects our law enforcement officers.
       It is now known that approximately 1,000 criminal illegal 
     aliens are released back into our communities from our 
     prisons each month, of which over 60% have ``significant 
     prior criminal histories . . .'', most of which include 
     serious felonies! Add this to the rampant crime perpetrated 
     by other illegal aliens in our country, and we have a matter 
     of national urgency.
       Violent illegal alien crimes resulting in the deaths of 
     American citizens, are unlike other killings. In every case, 
     Americans were killed by those persons who should never

[[Page 16075]]

     have been in our country. This legislation will send a 
     powerful message that the safety of Americans is the 
     priority. Most importantly, this legislation will save 
     American lives!
       I ask that each of you do all humanly possible to end these 
     deliberate and unsafe community law enforcement practices 
     wherein the killings of Americans is not only enabled but is 
     also well-known and documented.
           Sincerely,
                                                   Maria Espinoza,
     Co-founder and National Director.
                                  ____



                                          AmericaFirstLatinos,

                                    Houston, TX, October 16, 2015.
     Subject: Support of ``Stop Sanctuary Policies and Protect 
         Americans Act''

     Hon. David Vitter,
     Hart Senate Office Building,
     Washington, DC.
     Hon. Chuck Grassley,
     Chairman, Committee on the Judiciary,
     Hart Senate Office Building,
     Washington, DC.
     Hon. Ron Johnson,
     Hart Senate Office Building,
     Washington, DC.
     Hon. Ted Cruz,
     Russell Senate Office Building,
     Washington, DC.
     Hon. Pat Toomey,
     Russell Senate Office Building,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senators: On behalf of Latino voices in America, I 
     write this letter in support of legislation that will address 
     the reentry of illegal aliens, restrict federal finds to 
     cities that refuse to enforce laws that creates ``sanctuary 
     city policies'', and that also supports and protects law 
     enforcement officers.
       America First Latinos are proud to be Americans and proud 
     to live in this great country. We are activating nationwide 
     to remind public servants that the safety and well-being of 
     Americans must be the priority in America. Enforcing laws is 
     not racist, in fact, it is offensive for anyone to think that 
     Latinos approve of illegal immigration. Illegal immigration 
     is wrong. Sanctuary city policies condone lawless behaviors 
     and encourages more of the same behaviors, which reaches 
     deeper into our communities.
       Each day Americans are being killed and harmed by 
     individuals who should not be in our country. It is up to you 
     to stop this epidemic of killings and crimes against the 
     citizenry. I ask that each of you do all humanly possible to 
     end these dangerous sanctuary practices. Americans must be 
     the priority in America!
           Sincerely,
                                                     Pedro Rivera,
     Texas State Coordinator.
                                  ____



                               National Sheriffs' Association,

                                  Alexandria, VA, October 6, 2015.
     Hon. David Vitter,
     U.S. Senate, Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.
     Hon. Chuck Grassley,
     U.S. Senate, Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.
     Hon. Ron Johnson,
     U.S. Senate, Hart Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.
     Hon. Patrick Toomey,
     U.S. Senate, Russell Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.
     Hon. Ted Cruz,
     U.S. Senate, Russell Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Vitter, Senator Toomey, Senator Grassley, 
     Senator Cruz, and Senator Johnson: On behalf of the National 
     Sheriffs' Association and the more than 3,000 sheriffs 
     nationwide, I write today in support of legislation you 
     intend to introduce, the ``Stop Sanctuary Policies and 
     Protect American Act.'' This bill takes an important step in 
     clarifying the definition of sanctuary jurisdictions while 
     also offering additional protections for state and local 
     officers.
       As you all know, state and local law enforcement agencies 
     are critical partners in immigration and border security 
     efforts all across this country. For too long, however, those 
     officers had little to no liability protections when lawfully 
     enforcing Federal immigration detainers on behalf of the 
     Department of Homeland Security. Your bill takes the 
     important step of clarifying those protections so that 
     deputies acting within the bounds of the law will not be held 
     personally liability in future court actions. The grant 
     penalties you would impose also acknowledge that our public 
     safety entities should not be punished for the actions of a 
     state or local subdivision over which they may not have 
     control. I appreciate the careful consideration you clearly 
     gave that issue.
       On behalf of the National Sheriffs' Association, I applaud 
     your efforts on this important issue and look forward to 
     working with you on passage. If the National Sheriffs' 
     Association can be of assistance this or any other issue, 
     please don't hesitate to contact me.
           Sincerely,
     Jonathan F. Thompson.
                                  ____

                                           Federal Law Enforcement


                                         Officers Association,

                                  Washington, DC, October 6, 2015.
     Hon. David Vitter,
     U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
     Hon. Chuck Grassley,
     U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
     Hon. Ron Johnson,
     U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
     Hon. Pat Toomey,
     U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
     Hon. Ted Cruz,
     U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
       Dear Senators Vitter, Toomey, Grassley, Cruz, and Johnson: 
     On behalf of the Federal Law Enforcement Officers Association 
     (FLEOA), I thank you for introducing the Stop Sanctuary 
     Policies and Protect Americans Act, which will empower 
     federal and local law enforcement officers' cooperative 
     efforts to better protect our communities and our citizenry. 
     Your proposal will ensure we do not dishonor the memory of 
     Kate Steinle and the immeasurable grief her family is 
     enduring. It is critically important that all our law 
     enforcement assets are synchronized in pursuing our shared 
     responsibility of policing violent illegal aliens.
       Federal law enforcement officers rely on their state and 
     local counterparts to assist in keeping America's borders 
     secure and keeping criminal illegal immigrants off of the 
     streets. It's one team, one fight, as we all took the same 
     sacred oath to protect and defend the Constitution and the 
     American citizenry. We've been relying upon immigration 
     detainers--requests from the Department of Homeland Security 
     (DHS) for local law enforcement to hold an illegal immigrant 
     temporarily, to give federal law enforcement an opportunity 
     to take the individual into custody.
       Unfortunately, at least four courts have ruled that local 
     law enforcement officers may be sued for violating the Fourth 
     Amendment if they comply with an immigration detainer, even 
     if the detainer was lawfully issued and the detention would 
     have been legal if carried out by DHS. This means that our 
     local counterparts are exposed to potential civil liability 
     and it disables their ability to detain dangerous criminals 
     scheduled for release. The Stop Sanctuary Policies and 
     Protect Americans Act solves this problem by explicitly 
     stating that local law enforcement officers have legal 
     authority to comply with immigration detainers. The bill 
     protects civil liberties, ensuring that someone who has had 
     their constitutional rights violated may sue.
       The Stop Sanctuary Policies and Protect Americans Act takes 
     crucial steps to eliminating sanctuary jurisdictions, which 
     serve to shelter illegal aliens while posing real threats to 
     the American people. We must reassess our priorities and 
     remain committed to the unwavering premise of the safety of 
     the American citizenry is our top priority. The proper 
     response to Kate's tragic death is not to point fingers at 
     each other. Ms. Steinle was killed in San Francisco by an 
     illegal immigrant who had previously been deported from the 
     United States five times, and had been convicted of seven 
     felonies. The shooter chose to live in San Francisco because 
     he knew it was a sanctuary city that would shield him from 
     federal immigration law. Tragically, his ``sanctuary'' gambit 
     proved fatal for the Steinle family. Federal officials 
     requested that San Francisco detain the shooter until 
     immigration authorities could pick him up, but San Francisco 
     officials refused to cooperate and released Sanchez three 
     months before Kate's murder. We owe it to Kate and the 
     American citizenry to fix this critical community safety 
     issue now.
       We commend you for preserving flexibility for law 
     enforcement, so that victims of crime and witnesses to crime 
     who are in the U.S. illegally may come forward and cooperate 
     with police. FLEOA especially recognizes and appreciates 
     Senator Toomey's leadership and unwavering support for all 
     law enforcement officers. Both Senator Toomey and Vitter 
     understand that in America, the safety of Americans comes 
     first!
       FLEOA strongly supports the Stop Sanctuary Policies and 
     Protect Americans Act, and we look forward to working with 
     your offices to have this important legislation enacted into 
     law.
           Respectfully yours,
                                                        Jon Adler,
     FLEOA National President.
                                  ____

                                     International Union of Police


                                         Associations AFL-CIO,

                                                  October 8, 2015.
     Hon. Patrick Toomey,
     U.S. Senate,
     Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Toomey: The International Union of Police 
     Associations is proud to add our name to the list of 
     supporters of the bill addressing ``Sanctuary Cities'' titled 
     Stop Sanctuary Policies and Protect Americans Act. As it now 
     stands, our officers can be held liable for sharing relevant 
     information and honoring immigration detainers, even when 
     they are from federal immigration officials. This legislation 
     remedies that.
       Additionally, the bill provides a financial disincentive 
     for cities to become or remain ``sanctuary cities'' by 
     removing State Criminal Alien Assistance Program Funds which 
     were originally designated to provide financial assistance to 
     those counties and cities housing unlawful entrants. It also 
     restricts Community Block Grants. COPS grants are restricted 
     only if the law enforcement agency is the source of, and has 
     the power to

[[Page 16076]]

     change sanctuary city policy. It makes sense to us that a 
     political entity cannot expect finding from the federal 
     government when that city or county has made a decision to 
     ignore federal laws involving the very issues for which these 
     funds were prescribed.
       Finally, this legislation will provide a five year 
     mandatory minimum sentence for those illegal aliens who have 
     aggravated felony convictions and at least two prior 
     convictions for unlawful reentry. It is long past time to end 
     the revolving door of criminal aliens, who, even though 
     convicted of felony criminal activity and deported, 
     unlawfully return to prey upon our citizens.
       We both thank and applaud you for this thoughtful and 
     timely piece of legislation and we look forward to working 
     with you and your staff to see it signed into law.
           Very Respectfully,
                                                    Sam A. Cabral,
     International President.
                                  ____

                                           National Association of


                                   Police Organizations, Inc.,

                            Alexandria, Virginia, October 7, 2015.
     Senator David Vitter,
     U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
     Chairman Chuck Grassley,
     U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
     Senator Ron Johnson,
     U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
     Senator Pat Toomey,
     U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
     Senator Ted Cruz,
     U.S. Senate, Washington, DC.
       Dear Senators Vitter, Toomey, Grassley, Cruz, and Johnson: 
     On behalf of the National Association of Police Organizations 
     (NAPO), I am writing to you to express our support for the 
     Stop Sanctuary Policies and Protect Americans Act, which will 
     enable federal and local law enforcement officers to work 
     together to protect our communities.
       NAPO is a coalition of police unions and associations from 
     across the United States that serves to advance the interests 
     of America's law enforcement through legislative and legal 
     advocacy, political action, and education. Founded in 1978, 
     NAPO now represents more than 1,000 police units and 
     associations, 241,000 sworn law enforcement officers, and 
     more than 100,000 citizens who share a common dedication to 
     fair and effective crime control and law enforcement.
       The system relies on local law enforcement complying with 
     immigration detainers--requests from the Department of 
     Homeland Security (DHS) for local law enforcement to hold an 
     illegal immigrant temporarily, to give federal law 
     enforcement an opportunity to take the individual into 
     custody.
       Unfortunately, several courts have ruled that local law 
     enforcement officers may be sued for violating the Fourth 
     Amendment if they comply with an immigration detainer, even 
     if the detainer was lawfully issued and the detention would 
     have been legal if carried out by DHS. This means that 
     dangerous criminals cannot be held and must be released. The 
     Stop Sanctuary Policies ad Protect Americans Act solves this 
     problem by explicitly stating that local law enforcement 
     officers have legal authority to comply with immigration 
     detainers. The bill also protects civil liberties, ensuring 
     that someone who has had their constitutional rights violated 
     may sue.
       Furthermore, the Stop Sanctuary Policies and Protect 
     Americans Act takes crucial steps to eliminating sanctuary 
     jurisdictions, which pose real threats to the American 
     people, and increases penalties for criminals who re-enter 
     the United States illegally, providing federal, state and 
     local law enforcement vital tools to help keep our 
     communities safe.
       NAPO also commends you for preserving flexibility for law 
     enforcement, so that victims of crime and witnesses to crime 
     who are in the U.S. illegally may come forward and cooperate 
     with police.
       We look forward to working with your offices to pass this 
     important legislation. If we can provide any assistance, 
     please feel free to contact me.
           Sincerely,
                                               William J. Johnson,
                                               Executive Director.

  Mr. GRASSLEY. Some on the other side of the aisle are criticizing us 
for politicizing these recent attacks by criminal aliens and releases 
by sanctuary jurisdictions. We are being accused of attacking 
immigrants. However, I just want to note that the Democrats take no 
shame in politicizing the recent gun violence and promoting legislation 
that would not have stopped some of the shootings, from Newtown, CT, to 
Roseburg, OR.
  This is not a partisan issue. This bill protects law-abiding people 
and improves our public safety. Had it been enacted before July 1, 
individuals like Kate Steinle might still be with us.
  I would think we should all be able to agree that people who are in 
the country illegally and committing crimes should not be released back 
into the community. There has to be accountability and a commitment to 
uphold the rule of law. For too long we sat by while sanctuary 
jurisdictions released dangerous criminals into the community to harm 
our citizens. It is finally time that we put an end to it, and tomorrow 
we will have that opportunity. It is time we work toward protecting our 
communities rather than continue to put them in danger.
  I hope all of my colleagues will support this bill and vote to 
proceed to it tomorrow.
  I yield the floor.
  Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, for the first time in more than 2 years, 
the Senate is turning its attention to an issue related to our broken 
immigration system. But in stark contrast to the comprehensive, hopeful 
legislation last reported by the Senate Judiciary Committee, the 
majority is simply scheduling a show vote today on a divisive, partisan 
proposal that has not even been considered in the Judiciary Committee. 
What a difference a change in leadership makes.
  There are few topics more fundamental to who we are as a Nation than 
immigration. A consistent thread through our history is the arrival of 
new people to this country seeking a better life. Immigration has been 
an ongoing source of renewal for America--a renewal of our spirit, our 
creativity, and our economic strength.
  Two years ago, the Senate reaffirmed its commitment to these ideals 
when we approved S. 744, the Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and 
Immigration Modernization Act. That legislation, which was supported by 
68 Senators from both parties, would have meaningfully improved our 
great country by making our communities safer, strengthening our 
economy, improving border security, and keeping families together. It 
was a remarkable, bipartisan effort that was made better through the 
extensive amendment process in the Senate Judiciary Committee. It was 
an example of all that we can accomplish when we actually focus on the 
hard job of legislating.
  The bill we are considering today could not be more different. This 
legislation is not bipartisan. It does not reflect a desire to 
meaningfully improve what we all agree is a broken immigration system. 
Instead, this bill is, as the New York Times editorialized on Saturday, 
``a class-action slander against an immigrant population that has been 
scapegoated for the crimes of a few, and left stranded by the failure 
of legislative reform that would open a path for them to live fully 
within the law.''
  Those who support this bill point to a tragedy that captured our 
attention this summer. Any time an innocent person is killed, we have 
an obligation to understand what happened and try to prevent similar 
tragedies in the future. We all feel that way about the senseless and 
terribly cruel death of Kate Steinle. Her death was avoidable. Our 
system failed, period. And it is heart-wrenching that such a beautiful, 
young life was taken by a man who should never have been free on our 
streets.
  We are motivated to do something in the wake of her death. Just as we 
are motivated to act in the wake of the senseless killings of nine men 
and women attending a Bible study class in Charleston, SC. Or the nine 
innocent people brutally murdered at an Oregon community college. These 
are moments that demand leadership. We should roll up our sleeves and 
start to address the problems that led us here. We should address gun 
violence and the criminals who threaten our safety instead of 
characterizing entire immigrant communities as criminals.
  Unfortunately, it does not appear that we will be given that chance. 
Rather than marking this legislation up in Committee with input and 
amendments from both sides, the bill before us was yanked off of the 
Judiciary Committee agenda once the majority leader decided to bring it 
straight to the floor. Others can speculate about what motivated the 
timing of today's vote. What we know for sure is that this action goes 
against precisely what the majority leader promised last year when he 
said that ``[b]ills should go through Committee. And if Republicans are 
fortunate enough to gain the majority next year, they would.'' It is 
disappointing that he has broken his promise on legislation of such 
importance.

[[Page 16077]]

  If this bill were to become law, it would create two new mandatory 
minimums and cost us millions of dollars that we do not have. This 
would deny funding for critical services in local communities and do 
nothing to fix the broken immigration system we have today. At a time 
when the Judiciary Committee is engaged in a thoughtful, bipartisan 
effort to reform our criminal justice system and save taxpayers money 
in the process, it makes no sense to forgo that process for considering 
this immigration bill.
  If we are really trying to make our communities safer, we should 
listen to the police officers and law enforcement officials who 
dedicate their lives to that very mission. We should listen to domestic 
violence advocates who say the approach in this partisan bill will have 
a dangerous effect on the lives of women and children at risk. They are 
telling us this bill will make our communities less safe. It will 
undermine the trust and cooperation between police officers and 
immigrant communities. It will damage efforts to prevent crime and 
weaken their ability to apprehend those who prey on the public. That is 
why the National Fraternal Order of Police is opposed to policies that 
would be implemented by this bill. It is why the National Taskforce to 
End Sexual and Domestic Violence Against Women opposes this bill. It is 
why the U.S. Conference of Mayors opposes this bill.
  I ask unanimous consent that letters from the National Fraternal 
Order of Police and the National Taskforce to End Sexual and Domestic 
Violence Against Women be printed in the Record.
  I agree with Senator Heller, who noted: ``For two years we haven't 
had a discussion and so all the sudden we're going to bring up an 
immigration issue and not talk about the bigger issue.'' The problems 
plaguing our immigration system demand that we respond thoughtfully and 
responsibly. We can do better. We owe it to the American public to do 
better. I urge Senators to vote against cloture on this partisan bill 
that will not make us safer.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:
                                                National Fraternal


                                              Order of Police,

                                    Washington, DC, July 15, 2015.
     Hon. Mitch McConnell,
     Majority Leader, U.S. Senate,
     Washington, DC.
     Hon. Harry M. Reid,
     Minority Leader, U.S. Senate,
     Washington, DC.
     Hon. John A. Boehner,
     Speaker of the House, House of Representatives, Washington, 
         DC.
     Hon. Nancy P. Pelosi,
     Minority Leader, House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator McConnell, Mr. Speaker, Senator Reid and 
     Representative Pelosi: I am writing on behalf of the members 
     of the Fraternal Order of Police to advise you of our strong 
     opposition to any amendment or piece of legislation that 
     would penalize law enforcement agencies by withholding 
     Federal funding or resources from law enforcement assistance 
     programs in an effort to coerce a policy change in so-called 
     ``sanctuary cities.'' This is not meant to be construed as a 
     position on ``sanctuary cities,'' but rather on the use of 
     Federal programs as an enforcement mechanism.
       Local police departments answer to local civilian 
     government and it is the local government which enacts 
     statutes and ordinances in their communities. Law enforcement 
     officers have no more say in these matters than any other 
     citizen and, with laws like the Hatch Act in place, it can be 
     argued they have less. Law enforcement officers do not get to 
     pick and choose which laws to enforce and must carry out 
     lawful orders at the direction of their commanders and the 
     civilian government that employs them. It is wrong and a 
     gross unfairness to punish these brave men and women, or the 
     citizens they serve, because Congress disagrees with their 
     enforcement priorities with respect to our nation's 
     immigration laws.
       The FOP believes very strongly that local police 
     departments should at all times endeavor to cooperate with 
     their Federal law enforcement colleagues but they also must 
     follow the laws and policies of the government that employs 
     them. It is critical to public safety and national security 
     that local, State, Federal and tribal law enforcement work 
     together and rely on the expertise and resources that each 
     agency brings to the mission. This cannot be achieved if the 
     Federal government is reducing the resources available to 
     local law enforcement nor will it aid in cooperative efforts 
     to address threats to public safety.
       For these reasons, the FOP will vigorously oppose any 
     amendment, bill or other legislative effort which would 
     reduce or withhold funding or resources from any Federal 
     program for local and State law enforcement. If Congress 
     wishes to effect policy changes in these cities, it must find 
     another way to do so.
       On behalf of the more than 330,000 members of the Fraternal 
     Order of Police, I want to thank you for your consideration 
     of our view on this issue. Please feel free to contact me or 
     Executive Director Jim Pasco in my Washington office if I can 
     be of any further assistance.
           Sincerely,
                                                 Chuck Canterbury,
     National President.
                                  ____

         National Task Force To End Sexual and Domestic Violence 
           Against Women,
                                                 October 14, 2015.
       Dear Senator: As the Steering Committee of the National 
     Taskforce to End Sexual and Domestic Violence (NTF), 
     comprising national leadership organizations advocating on 
     behalf of sexual and domestic violence victims and women's 
     rights, we represent hundreds of organizations across the 
     country dedicated to ensuring all survivors of violence 
     receive the protections they deserve. For this reason, we 
     write to express our deep concerns about the impact that S. 
     2146, the ``Stop Sanctuary Policies and Protect Americans 
     Act,'' will have on communities with ``sanctuary'' policies. 
     Such legislation will be dangerous for all victims of sexual 
     assault, domestic violence, and trafficking, and in 
     particular, for immigrant victims, and communities at large.
       S. 2146 undermines policies that local jurisdictions have 
     determined are Constitutionally sound and appropriate for 
     their respective communities, and it decreases the ability of 
     law enforcement agencies to respond to violent crimes and 
     assist all victims of crime, U.S. Citizens, and immigrants 
     alike. As recognized in the bipartisan Violence Against Women 
     Act (VAWA), law enforcement plays a critical role in our 
     coordinated community response to domestic and sexual 
     violence. Law enforcement funds support critical training, 
     equipment, and agency staffing that assists domestic and 
     sexual violence victims. Provisions in S. 2146 that reduce 
     funding for law enforcement agencies will allow violent 
     crimes to go uninvestigated and leave victims without 
     redress.
       In addition, provisions in S. 2146 seek to reduce Community 
     Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds to communities with 
     ``sanctuary'' policies, which will harm communities by 
     reducing access to critical housing and community services 
     that are accessed by all victims, including both U.S. 
     Citizens and immigrants.
       Community trust policies are critical tools for increasing 
     community safety. We recently celebrated the twenty-first 
     anniversary of VAWA, which has, since it was first enacted, 
     included critical protections for immigrant victims of 
     domestic and sexual violence. Laws that seek to intertwine 
     the immigration and law enforcement systems will undermine 
     the Congressional purpose of protections enacted under VAWA 
     and will have the chilling effect of pushing immigrant 
     victims into the shadows and allow criminals to walk on our 
     streets. As VAWA recognizes, immigrant victims of violent 
     crimes often do not contact law enforcement due to fear that 
     they will be deported. According to a study conducted by the 
     National Domestic Violence Hotline and the National Latin@ 
     Network: Casa de Esperanza, 45% of the foreign-born callers 
     expressed fear of calling and/or seeking help from the police 
     or courts. Furthermore, 12% of US-Born callers expressed fear 
     of seeking help due to the current wave of anti-immigrant 
     policies. Immigrants are already afraid of contacting the 
     police and these policies will only exacerbate this fear.
       Perpetrators use fear of deportation as abuse. Local 
     policies that minimize intertwining of local law enforcement 
     with ICE help bring the most vulnerable victims out of the 
     shadows by creating trust between law enforcement and the 
     immigrant community, which in turn help protect entire 
     communities. Abusers and traffickers use the fear of 
     deportation of their victims as a tool to silence and trap 
     them. Not only are the individual victims harmed, but their 
     fear of law enforcement leads many to abstain from reporting 
     violent perpetrators or coming forward, and, as a result, 
     dangerous criminals are not identified and go unpunished. 
     These criminals remain on the streets and continue to be a 
     danger to our communities.
       S. 2146's harsh criminal penalties will harm victims of 
     trafficking, sexual assault, and domestic violence. Immigrant 
     victims are vulnerable to being arrested and prosecuted for 
     crimes directly connected to their victimization. For 
     example, victims of domestic violence are arrested and 
     convicted of domestic violence related crimes, even when they 
     are not the primary perpetrator of violence in the 
     relationship, due to language and cultural barriers. In 
     addition, victims of sex trafficking are often arrested and 
     convicted of prostitution-related offenses. Often, victims 
     are desperate to be released, and in some cases, reunited 
     with their children

[[Page 16078]]

     upon arrest and/or during trial. These factors--combined with 
     poor legal counsel, particularly about the immigration 
     consequences of criminal pleas and convictions--have in the 
     past and will likely continue to lead to the deportation of 
     wrongly accused victims who may have pled to or been unfairly 
     convicted of domestic violence charges.
       For these reasons, we urge you to affirm the intent and 
     spirit of VAWA and oppose S. 2146 and other similar 
     legislative proposals that may be introduced. Thank you very 
     much for taking this important step to protect and support 
     immigrant survivors of domestic violence, trafficking, and 
     sexual assault.
       For more information, please contact Grace Huang, 
     Washington State Coalition Against Domestic Violence or 
     Andrea Carcamo, National Latin@ Network: Casa de Esperanza.
           Sincerely,
     The National Task Force To End Sexual and Domestic Violence.

                          ____________________