Senate committee tables juvenile‑immigration reporting bill after hours of testimony; DJJ and prosecutors split with civil‑rights groups

The Senate Courts of Justice Committee voted 9–6 to pass by indefinitely (PBI) a bill (referred to in committee as SB 1268) that would have added statutory procedures for reporting immigration status and for local agreements concerning non‑citizens adjudicated of violent juvenile felonies.

Sponsor Senator Doreen Durant framed the measure as a technical fix that would mirror existing adult reporting pathways in the juvenile system so that officials could identify and coordinate with federal immigration authorities when appropriate for public safety. James Tuohy, speaking for the Department of Juvenile Justice (DJJ), told the committee the bill largely mirrors adult provisions and sought to add specificity to a currently vague statutory standard about when to report possible immigration status.

Opponents — including Sophia Gregg, senior immigrant rights attorney at the ACLU of Virginia; representatives from the Virginia Interfaith Center for Public Policy; Legal Aid Justice Center; Casa (immigrant advocacy); and other immigrant‑rights groups — urged the committee to reject the bill. They argued the measure would “pervert” the rehabilitative purpose of the juvenile system, risk increased detention and transfer to federal custody, subject juveniles to questioning about immigration status without sufficient safeguards, and chill contact with courts and service providers. Gregg said the bill would “subject children to further detention, incarceration, and violations of their rights” and questioned the need for the change given existing notice rules.

Sheriffs’ and prosecutors’ representatives told the committee their interest was limited: they described existing local practices of notifying federal authorities in cases involving violent juvenile felonies and sought statutory clarity to avoid ambiguity between juvenile and adult procedures. Nathan Green, Commonwealth’s Attorney for Williamsburg and James City County, told the committee the measure would allow juvenile judges to use the serious‑offender commitment process in juvenile court more consistently rather than forcing certification to adult circuit court in some narrow and severe cases.

Committee members raised constitutional concerns about portions of the draft that addressed governor‑level negotiations with foreign governments; the treaty/transfer language was removed on a committee vote after members objected that international diplomacy is a federal function. Members also questioned whether the current law already required notification and whether the bill’s added language was necessary.

The committee voted to pass the bill by indefinitely after extensive debate and public comment. Vote: Ayes 9, Noes 6 (clerk roll recorded in transcript). That result effectively tabled the measure at this point in the session.

Why it matters: Sponsors said the bill would provide procedural clarity to juvenile courts and detention facilities; opponents said it risks harm to children, jeopardizes confidentiality and due process, and could increase immigrant families’ fear of engaging with the juvenile justice and social‑services systems. The PBI vote leaves the matter unresolved and indicates both procedural and policy concerns that sponsors and opponents will likely continue to negotiate before any new proposal reaches the floor.

Speakers (key): Deonte Diggs, Lieutenant, Stafford County Sheriff's Office; James Tuohy, Department of Juvenile Justice; Sophia Gregg, ACLU of Virginia; Sheila Hurley Hennessy, Virginia Interfaith Center for Public Policy; Nathan Green, Commonwealth’s Attorney (Williamsburg / James City County).