Michigan Senate Debates Restrictions on Immigration Enforcement
In a move that has sparked significant public interest, Michigan lawmakers are considering a set of bills that aim to establish restrictions on federal immigration enforcement activities across the state. The legislative package, primarily sponsored by Democrats, had its initial hearing on Thursday, drawing large crowds eager to express their concerns and opinions about current immigration policies.
The proposed bills would prohibit immigration enforcement actions in locations considered sensitive, such as schools, houses of worship, and hospitals. Additionally, they would restrict law enforcement officers from wearing masks in most situations and prevent the state from sharing personal data with immigration officials unless a warrant is provided.
Jeni Hooper, representing First Step, a Wayne County shelter for survivors of sexual and domestic violence, addressed the Senate Civil Rights, Judiciary, and Public Safety Committee. She highlighted the challenges faced by those seeking help due to the presence and fear of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). “When safe spaces, like domestic violence agencies, shelters, schools, courts and schools are not clearly protected, survivors face an impossible choice,” Hooper emphasized.
Opposition to the bills was voiced by Shari Rendall of the Federation for American Immigration Reform (FAIR), who argued that the legislation unfairly targets immigration officers and limits ICE’s operational scope. According to Rendall, “Courthouses are not sensitive locations. ICE knows that individuals in locations like a courthouse are unarmed. It is safer for the individual, it is safer for law enforcement, it is safer for the public for them to take someone into custody there.”
FAIR is recognized as a hate group by the Southern Poverty Law Center.
During the hearing, Senator Jim Runestad, who leads the Michigan Republican Party, encountered limitations from the committee’s Democratic chair while attempting to debate the broader immigration policy. He criticized the proceedings as a “kangaroo court” and contended that the bills might be deemed unconstitutional, arguing that state laws cannot supersede federal authority.
The legislation also includes a measure to ban law enforcement officers from using masks or disguises, with exceptions for protection against facial injuries or airborne hazards. This prohibition does not apply to officers engaged in undercover tasks.
Adding to the debate, former Detroit Police Chief Ike McKinnon expressed concerns that masked officers erode public trust in law enforcement. “They can basically do what they want to and the people of that respective community (do) not know who they are,” he noted, describing the situation as alarming.
The timeline for when the bills might advance to the Senate floor remains uncertain. However, Senator Stephanie Chang, chair of the committee, indicated plans for additional hearings and expressed a desire for prompt voting.
—
Read More Michigan News
