Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Local Immigration Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Philadelphia council committee hears testimony on seven‑bill 'ICE out' package amid officials' implementation caveats
Summary
A City Council committee heard testimony on seven ordinances that would limit local cooperation with immigration enforcement, tighten data protections, and restrict use of city property; administration witnesses pledged many implementation steps but flagged legal issues, while advocates described fear, service drops, and courthouse arrests.
Get email alerts on the Local Immigration Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Philadelphia City Council’s committee of the whole held a public hearing on a seven‑bill “ICE out” package that sponsors say would limit local participation in federal immigration enforcement, strengthen confidentiality of immigration‑related data, add nondiscrimination protections for citizenship or immigration status, and bar certain uses of city property and city contracts for immigration enforcement. The hearing, held in City Hall, drew administration witnesses and community advocates who described widespread fear and service disruptions in immigrant communities.
Council Member Ru Landal and Minority Leader Kendra Brooks opened the hearing by describing the package and its goals. Landal said the bills “draw a clear line” that the city “will not be complicit in policies that undermine the safety and dignity of our neighbors,” and Brooks said hundreds of community trainings and thousands of petition signatures underlie the legislation’s urgency.
Charles Ellison, executive director of the Office of Immigrant Affairs, testified that the Parker administration supports the intent of much of the package — in particular bill 260058 to add immigration/citizenship status as a protected class under the Fair Practices Ordinance — but that the law department has flagged legal problems in six of the seven bills in a confidential analysis. Ellison described existing executive orders (referred to in testimony as Executive Orders 08‑09 and 05‑16) that already limit city employees’ collection and disclosure of immigration status, prohibit honoring administrative detainers without a judicial warrant, and prohibit inquiries into immigration status unless required by law.
"We understand and appreciate the intent behind this legislation," Ellison said, while urging that implementation be robust: "Our expectation is that they are implemented fully, faithfully, without exception." Ellison listed steps the administration plans or is taking — updated procurement language to better protect personal information, distribution of guidance from the law department, virtual trainings for city staff, and review of signage and building‑use policies for city properties.
City Solicitor Renee Garcia said any requests for records from federal authorities would be routed to her office and reviewed against both Right‑to‑Know procedures and the city’s executive orders. "We do not collect immigrant information and we do not disclose immigrant information without the consent," Garcia said, adding that redaction and legal scrutiny would apply to requests that include such data.
Deputy Police Commissioner Fran Healey described a recently finalized Police Commissioner’s memorandum that documents prior practice for interactions involving ICE and said the department will follow that memo and provide training to officers. Healey told council members the department is not sharing custody or release date information with ICE and that ICE does not have access to the city’s PARS preliminary‑arraignment system. On the question of perimeters or operational assistance, Healey said police would only respond to threats to public safety (for example, physical assaults) and would not otherwise participate in civil immigration enforcement.
Council members repeatedly pressed for concrete timelines and clear training rollouts for building managers, police officers, and other city staff; Ellison and Healey said training and distribution plans are imminent and that the administration will continue road shows and department briefings.
Advocacy and front‑line groups gave emotional testimony about the effects of recent enforcement activity. Jay Lee of UDI Center described spikes in arrests and a chilling effect on businesses and school attendance; Daisy Romero of Huntos and other community witnesses described thousands of hotline reports of ICE activity, cases of rapid detention leading to quick deportations, and people avoiding court, health care and social services out of fear. A 14‑year‑old youth leader with Make the Road PA testified she missed school to attend the hearing because she fears losing parents to enforcement.
Kesha Hudson of the Defender Association said ICE arrests have occurred at or near the Criminal Justice Center and described clients who were detained before they could meaningfully participate in their proceedings; she reported that the Defender Association has filed habeas petitions and secured releases in some cases. Allison Sprag of Victim Witness Services said immigrant victims’ engagement with services has declined roughly 20 percent and that survivors’ missed court appearances have doubled in the past year in some matters.
No formal votes were taken. The committee recessed to continue panels and public comment later in the day. Sponsors and witnesses said they expect to continue negotiations on technical legal language and implementation details; several council members urged that passage be paired immediately with clear training, signage and funding to ensure the protections are operational.
What’s next: Council members said the law department is still reviewing amendments introduced Friday and that further legal analysis will follow; the committee planned more panels and public comment after a brief recess.

