Kansas committee hears opponents of SCR 16-02 urging governor to cooperate with federal immigration enforcement

Chair Kessler opened a hearing on Senate Concurrent Resolution 16-02, a concurrent resolution that “basically urges the governor to fully cooperate with the Trump administration in enforcing immigration laws in the state of Kansas,” the Reviser's Office told the committee.

The resolution, as described by the Reviser's Office, “encourages the governor to use her lawful authority to help secure United States borders, including offering assistance through the Kansas National Guard.” The measure is a statement of the Legislature’s view rather than a statutory change.

Sister Therese Bangert, a Sister of Charity who said she has lobbied the Kansas Legislature for decades, testified in opposition. “I agree that we have a broken immigration system,” she told the committee, and said the state’s agricultural and meat‑packing workforces rely on immigrant labor. She cautioned that recent enforcement actions have not been limited to people with criminal convictions and cited a recent ICE raid in Liberty, Missouri, as an example that affected workers she described as “women who are milking the cows.”

The committee heard from other opponents. Beto Martinez (Webex) said siding with federal enforcement would “enable intimidation of state and local officials and . . . attack our immigrant communities,” and warned of broad economic and institutional impacts if state and local governments lost federal funding or curtailed services. Martinez cited a study he attributed to the National Immigration Law Center that estimated immigrant contributions to the economy and said the state could suffer revenue losses; the committee did not adopt any numeric fiscal finding on the record during the hearing.

Several legislators asked questions or offered comments during the hearing. Representative Rees asked Sister Therese about statements by Pope Francis; Sister Therese responded that the pope’s emphasis on human dignity shapes her view. Representative Akala and others raised concerns about the resolution’s potential local impacts on businesses and law enforcement. Representative Mosley asked about “moral injury” and the effect of family separations on community cohesion and child welfare; Sister Therese replied that separating parents can cause a “primal wound” for children and weaken family stability.

Committee members who spoke at the hearing voiced a mix of views. Some framed the measure as symbolic because it is a resolution rather than a law; others said it could nonetheless affect communities by encouraging enforcement actions at the local level. The Reviser's Office clarified the document is a concurrent resolution and that written proponents had filed testimony, but no proponent offered live oral testimony at the committee on the record.

No formal committee action or vote on SCR 16-02 was recorded during the hearing; the committee closed the hearing after oral testimony and stated that written testimony would be available on the committee drive for members’ review.

Why this matters: SCR 16-02 is a nonbinding legislative statement, but witnesses and some members said its enactment could signal state cooperation with federal enforcement and could carry downstream effects for Kansas communities, local governments, employers, and children.

What’s next: The committee did not report a final vote on SCR 16-02 at the hearing; members were directed to the written testimony posted to the committee S‑drive.