Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Immigration 287g Guidance topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

House adopts memorial urging DHS guidance and training for 287(g) agreements

2307656 · February 13, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Florida House on Feb. 13 adopted Senate Memorial 6C asking the U.S. Department of Homeland Security to provide guidance and training on 287(g) agreements; the measure passed by voice vote after structured debate.

The Florida House on Feb. 13 adopted Senate Memorial 6C, a nonbinding request asking the U.S. Department of Homeland Security to provide guidance and training opportunities for 287(g) agreements. Representative Kennedy moved to waive the rules, substitute the Senate message for House Memorial 5C and have the Senate memorial read twice by title; the House approved the motion and the measure was read by title and adopted. The clerk recorded 85 yeas and 27 nays on the memorial.

Supporters said the memorial seeks federal guidance to help local and state partners work with federal immigration authorities. Representative Kennedy said President Trump's executive order directed DHS to expand 287(g) arrangements and that the memorial "urges the DHS to provide guidance, training opportunities, and other necessary directives to maximize Florida's impact" in supporting federal efforts. Representative Hunchoskie and Representative Henson raised concerns that the federal immigration system is broken and urged Congress to act; Representative Henson said, "The Trump Act is back. These bills break families apart. They make our neighbors afraid of going to a neighborhood market or going to church." His remarks were delivered during debate on the memorial.

The memorial is a formal expression of the House's position but does not create state policy or funding. The discussion occurred under a structured debate clock (five minutes per side, total debate limited to 10 minutes). Proponents framed the measure as seeking federal technical assistance for local partners; critics used the floor time to emphasize the need for congressional action on immigration policy.

The House moved on afterward to other immigration-related measures on the special order calendar.