Citizen Portal
Sign In

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

Get email alerts on the Immigration Enforcement topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Sponsors present 'America First Act' to Public Safety Committee, sparking debate over state enforcement and due process

House Public Safety Committee · June 11, 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

Sponsors of House Bill 200 told the Public Safety Committee the 'America First Act' would align Ohio law with federal immigration statutes and require local cooperation with ICE, including reporting and limited holds; members questioned preemption, sentencing, juvenile treatment and due process.

Representatives Gary Click and Nick Santucci presented sponsor testimony for House Bill 200, the "America First Act," at a June 10 hearing of the House Public Safety Committee. Click said the measure "aligns Ohio law with federal law" and would make it unlawful for someone unlawfully present in the United States to be in Ohio, establishing a baseline penalty of a $500 fine and up to one year in jail for violations and requiring those released to leave the state within 72 hours unless a judicial stay is granted.

Santucci, the joint sponsor, said the bill includes provisions requiring law enforcement agencies and corrections facilities to cooperate with U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) and to notify ICE of detainees believed to be unlawfully present; the testimony said facilities could be required to detain individuals for 48 hours after receiving a lawful ICE request. "According to the language of this bill, they can be released to ICE," Santucci said when asked about whether local officers could hand over detainees to federal authorities.

Committee members pressed sponsors on legal and practical issues. Ranking Member Thomas asked whether the bill risks federal preemption of immigration law; Santucci replied the bill "aligns" with federal law and does not attempt to determine immigration status, a point sponsors said would be subject to judicial review in ongoing litigation in other states. Members also questioned the statute's 12‑month maximum jail term for unlawful presence and raised concerns about noncitizen juveniles and due process. Santucci said judges may grant a 90‑day stay for asylum seekers or those pursuing visa extensions and that the stay may be extended at judicial discretion.

Representatives urged adjustments. Representative Plummer, a former sheriff, recommended bifurcating penalties to impose stiffer sanctions on violent or cartel‑linked offenders while treating overstays and administrative violations differently. Sponsors welcomed committee input and said they had worked with the Legislative Service Commission and ICE when drafting elements of the bill, and that portions were modeled on other states' measures.

The committee did not take an immediate vote on HB200. Chair Abrams closed the first hearing after members completed questions and sponsors said they were willing to consider amendments during the committee process.

Note on testimony and numbers: sponsors cited crime and population figures during testimony (for example, testimony referenced "15,400,000 unlawful immigrants" and state estimates). These figures are reported here as stated in committee testimony and not independently verified in this article.