Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Immigration Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Montgomery County hears hours of testimony on “Promoting Community Trust Act”
Summary
Dozens of residents, faith leaders, students and county officials gave mixed testimony at a Jan. 13 public hearing on Expedited Bill 35‑25, the Promoting Community Trust Act. Supporters said codifying the county’s ICE limits would protect due process and restore trust; opponents warned of reduced federal-local cooperation and public-safety risks.
Council President Natalie Fanny Gonzalez opened a Jan. 13 public hearing on Expedited Bill 35‑25, the Promoting Community Trust Act, telling the room the council will hold a joint committee work session on the bill on Jan. 28, 2026.
County Assistant Chief Administrative Officer Earl Stoddard, testifying on behalf of County Executive Mark Elrich, framed the measure as an update to a 2019 executive order limiting county involvement in federal immigration enforcement. "County agencies do not collect immigration status unless required as part of a federal program eligibility assessment," Stoddard said, adding the county does not participate in federal immigration enforcement operations and will not hold individuals beyond legally mandated release timelines.
Advocates described widespread local harm from recent ICE activity and urged passage. Ama Frimpong, legal director at CASA, said the bill "sends an unequivocal message" that county agents will not act as ICE agents and that protections are narrow and preserve cooperation on valid judicial warrants. Sean Link of the Maryland Office of the Public Defender's Immigration Division emphasized due‑process concerns, saying the bill "places reasonable limits on information that local officials can share with ICE after an arrest and yet prior to any conviction."
Multiple faith leaders, students and nonprofit representatives told personal or constituent stories they said illustrated the bill’s need. Rabbi Scott Perlow of Jews United for Justice contrasted religious teachings about welcoming strangers with recent federal immigration actions and urged protection for families; high‑school students and community organizers recounted family detentions that they said disrupted schooling and livelihoods.
Opponents raised safety and legal concerns. Amy Wyckoff, speaking in opposition, argued the measure would "function as a sanctuary policy that undermines the rule of law" and cited federal statutes and past local cases to warn of information‑sharing obstacles. Several speakers warned that limits on cooperation could constrain federal investigations in ways they said would endanger residents.
Witnesses on all sides urged clarity about the bill’s scope. Supporters repeatedly noted the measure was designed to preserve local public‑safety priorities while curbing voluntary local assistance to federal civil immigration enforcement; some urged that protections be paired with additional county resources for health, education and legal services.
The hearing closed after multiple panels of testimony and the council announced the measure will be discussed at a scheduled Jan. 28 joint committee work session. The public record remains open for written submissions through the stated deadlines.
Next procedural step: joint Public Safety & Government Operations and Fiscal Policy committee work session, Jan. 28, 2026.
