New Jersey is moving to adopt legal sanctuary state protections against the federal government’s planned deportations

1

TRENTON, NJ — Two opposing bills are fueling intense debate in New Jersey over the state’s approach to immigration enforcement, with one proposal promoting protections for undocumented immigrants and the other seeking to mandate cooperation with federal authorities. The legislative clash highlights the growing divide over immigration policy in the state.

The first measure, titled the New Jersey Immigrant Trust Act, would limit state and local involvement in federal immigration enforcement, effectively codifying New Jersey as a sanctuary state. It seeks to prevent the use of state resources, including law enforcement and government databases, to assist federal immigration authorities in detaining or deporting individuals. The bill also includes provisions to protect sensitive locations such as schools, hospitals and shelters from immigration enforcement actions.

Supporters of the Immigrant Trust Act say the law is essential to fostering trust between immigrant communities and local government, ensuring access to vital services without fear of deportation. The bill would also restrict law enforcement authorities from questioning people about their immigration status or complying with federal detention requests unless mandated by a court order. “This legislation ensures that everyone in New Jersey can feel safe accessing essential services and living life without fear,” the bill’s sponsors said in legislative hearings.

The second bill takes the opposite approach, seeking to prohibit New Jersey or its municipalities from enacting sanctuary policies. It requires cooperation with US Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and sanctions local governments that refuse to comply with federal requests. Lawmakers supporting the bill cite cases such as the 2015 killing of Kate Steinle in San Francisco by an undocumented immigrant in a sanctuary city as evidence of the dangers of limiting cooperation with federal authorities.

“This bill is about public safety and making sure that violent criminals don’t fall through the cracks because of local policies,” supporters of the anti-sanctuary bill said in their statement. The proposal would impose ethics violations and fines on officials who try to block federal immigration enforcement efforts.

If passed, the Immigrant Trust Act would require significant policy changes at state agencies, with new privacy guidelines for public institutions and mandatory law enforcement training on the bill’s provisions. Competing legislation, meanwhile, would require local officials to cooperate with federal immigration authorities and report compliance, with the goal of discouraging municipalities from informal practices of non-cooperation.

The debate has drawn sharp lines between immigrant advocates, who warn that increased federal cooperation could erode trust and discourage people from seeking essential services, and opponents, who argue that sanctuary policies endanger public safety. Both measures are under active consideration in the state legislature.

As New Jersey lawmakers deliberate, the outcome will shape the state’s immigration law enforcement landscape, with national implications for the sanctuary state debate.