Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Immigration Enforcement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Senate concurs on bill to allow state prosecution of crimes by noncitizens; opponents cite constitutionality and fiscal burden
Summary
House Bill 214, which clarifies that the state may prosecute crimes by noncitizens and requires county prosecutors to notify the attorney general when declining to prosecute certain cases, passed the Senate 31-19 after extended debate over constitutionality, administrative burden, and potential prison cost impacts.
The Montana Senate on March 21 concurred in House Bill 214, a measure that the sponsor described as clarifying the state's authority to prosecute crimes committed by noncitizens and requiring county attorneys to notify the attorney general when they decline to prosecute certain cases involving noncitizens. Senator Joe Manzella moved concurrence; the Senate voted 31 to 19 in favor.
Manzella, the floor carrier, said the bill “codifies that the state may actually prosecute illegal aliens who commit state crimes” and directs county prosecutors to inform the attorney general’s office if they choose not to prosecute specified cases. “This takes one step in that direction,” Manzella said in closing remarks.
The nut graf: supporters argued the bill empowers local authorities and addresses so-called “catch-and-release” situations; opponents warned it raises constitutional questions, imposes administrative burdens on counties and the attorney general’s office, and could increase prison-related costs.
Missoula County’s delegate on the floor, Senator Jon Olson, said his county “strongly opposes House Bill 214,” pointing to a likely administrative load: he estimated the county could face about 7,000 cases per year that would require immigration-status checks and notifications to the attorney general under the bill’s language and noted no fiscal note accompanied the measure. “This would also increase the work of the AG having 7,000 contacts with Missoula County alone,” Olson said.
Other opponents, including Senator Newman reading from the Attorney General’s opinion, argued the bill may be unconstitutional because federal immigration enforcement is a federal civil enforcement regime and states cannot convert federal civil enforcement into state criminal actions. Senator Smith (floor) warned the bill could have substantial prison cost implications because it would potentially open prosecutions across Title 45 of the criminal code.
Proponents countered that assisting federal immigration enforcement and ensuring local prosecutors have the option to pursue criminal charges is within the state’s authority. Senator Emmerich said the statute applies only to the subset of cases described in subsection 1 and is unlikely to create the enormous caseload opponents described.
The motion to concur in House Bill 214 passed by a 31-19 vote. The measure was recorded as concurred on second reading and re-referred as required by Senate procedures.
