Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Immigration Enforcement Healthcare topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
'Health Care Without Fear' hearing draws broad testimony; sponsors, nurses and hospitals seek language fixes
Summary
Senate Bill 15 70 and a proposed -1 amendment would restrict federal immigration enforcement access to nonpublic areas of healthcare facilities, require policies and notice postings, and prohibit employer retaliation for staff sharing legal information; frontline workers urged passage while hospital groups warned the -1 needs clearer language to avoid liability and operational risks.
Senate Bill 15 70, titled in testimony the "Health Care Without Fear" act, drew broad testimony from frontline health‑care workers, sponsors and provider associations at the Senate Committee on Health Care.
Sponsor Senator Winzve Campos told the committee the bill is intended to ensure patients are not afraid to seek medical care and to provide clear, statewide standards for how federal immigration authorities may operate in healthcare settings. Campos said the bill does not obstruct lawful enforcement but would require facilities to designate administrators to interface with federal agents, adopt written policies, post summaries of individual rights and available legal services, and prohibit retaliation against workers who share lawful, vetted information.
Representative Dacia Graber, a firefighter and paramedic, described incidents she and first responders have witnessed where federal agents entered hospitals without clear identification or adherence to established protocols and said the bill seeks to protect patient care and professional roles.
Numerous nurses and health‑care staff described encounters that they said undermined patient privacy and safety: a charge nurse reported ICE agents initially refusing to remove face coverings, repeated agent presence on units, shackled detainees at risk of falling and families deterred from seeking care. Nurses said these experiences create fear that deters preventive and emergency care.
Provider groups — including the Oregon Primary Care Association and the Hospital Association of Oregon — supported the bill’s goals but opposed the current -1 language, citing concerns it could put frontline employees between armed law enforcement and patients, impose unclear posting or surveillance duties on staff, and create liability or administrative burdens without clearer enforcement and resource provisions. Hospital and primary‑care leaders asked for a collaborative -2 amendment and additional resources and training for facilities.
What’s next: The committee carried over the public hearing on SB 15 70 to Feb. 9 at 3:00 p.m. to allow additional witnesses to testify and to continue negotiations on amendment language.
