Philadelphia ‘ICE Out’ legislation: Here’s what to know as City Council weighs bills

Philadelphia City Council passed a legislative package of seven bills that restrict federal immigration enforcement activities in the city on April 23.

“When federal agents are terrorizing our communities and executing American citizens in the street, we must take action,” Councilmember and Minority Leader Kendra Brooks told a crowd in January at a rally announcing the legislation, just days after federal immigration enforcement agents shot and killed a second U.S. citizen in Minneapolis.

“ICE is already here in Philadelphia, tearing families apart and forcing people to live in fear,” she said. “Every day we’re seeing new reports of ICE’s cruelty and violence. I refuse to wait for another person to be publicly murdered before we take action on this issue.”

Here is everything you need to know about the bills.

What does Philadelphia’s ‘ICE Out’ legislation entail?

If approved by Council and made law, the measures would:

• Prohibit ICE agents and all other law enforcement officers from wearing masks or using unmarked vehicles, and require them to display badges, with exceptions for undercover work, SWAT teams and medical purposes.
• Codify the city’s longstanding commitment to not participating in collaboration agreements with ICE under its 287(g) program.
• Prohibit city agencies, including police, from collaborating with ICE and other federal civil immigration enforcement agents absent a judicial warrant.
• Prohibit city agencies from collecting information on people’s citizenship or immigration status and sharing that information or other personal data with ICE.
• Prohibit discrimination based on citizenship or immigration status by city agencies, employers, housing providers or businesses.
• Bar ICE from conducting raids on city-owned properties.
• Ban ICE access, absent a judicial warrant, to city-owned spaces, including libraries, health centers, shelters and rec centers.

Which members of Philadelphia City Council supported the bills?

At-large Councilmembers Kendra Brooks, Working Families Party, and Rue Landau, Democratic Party, introduced the legislation in January. All seven of the bills passed with a veto-proof majority of the 17-member Council.

“Philly is now on the map,” said Landau following the final vote on April 23. “The entire country and possibly the world, is watching us as having some of the strongest ice out protections in the entire country. We stood together and we told them what the community wants.”

What is Mayor Cherelle Parker’s position on the ‘ICE Out’ legislation?

Backed by a veto-proof vote in Council, the bills will become law with or without Mayor Cherelle Parker’s signature.

The legislation now heads to Parker’s desk, where she can either sign the bills into law, do nothing and let it become law, or reject the measures. The measures will go into effect 60 days after becoming law.

Immigrant rights groups and advocates have criticized Parker for not speaking out against President Donald Trump’s mass deportation campaign.

Parker has maintained an executive order dating to 2016 that limits police cooperation with ICE, and she suggested that her reticence is a strategy to maintain federal funding and protect against retaliation of the kind Trump has previously threatened against so-called “sanctuary” jurisdictions that have passed similar legislation restricting ICE.

At an April 13 hearing on the legislation, Charles Ellison, the executive director of the Office of Immigrant Affairs, said Parker’s administration “wholeheartedly supports” one of the bills, which provides protection against discrimination based on citizenship or immigration status via an update to the city’s Fair Practices Ordinance.

However, Ellison said the six other measures in the package, including a bill banning masks for law enforcement officers, are “legally problematic.”

The U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals recently blocked similar legislation passed in California that banned ICE agents from wearing masks.

What do immigrant rights groups and other stakeholders say about the legislation?

More than 70 organizations endorsed the legislation:

• The American Civil Liberties Union of Pennsylvania
• New Sanctuary Movement of Philadelphia
• Make the Road Pennsylvania
• Woori Center
• Asian Americans United
• Council on American-Islamic Relations-Philadelphia
• Victim/Witness Services of South Philadelphia
• National Domestic Workers Alliance
• OnePA
• Philly UNITE HERE
• Pennsylvania Working Families Party
• Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society Pennsylvania
• VietLead
• Philly Democratic Socialists of America
• Abolitionist Law Center
• Service Employees International Union 32BJ
• American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees District Council 47
• The Philadelphia Federation of Teachers
• The Defender Association of Philadelphia
• UNITE HERE Local 274

More than 1,000 Philadelphians have signed a petition in support of the legislation.

Who is opposed to the legislation?

Some residents defended ICE and the Trump administration’s federal immigration enforcement operation at Council hearings and meetings.

The Philadelphia ICE Field Office and the U.S. Department of Homeland Security did not respond to a request for comment.

How does Philly’s ‘ICE Out’ package compare to other ICE-related laws in the region?

Other counties and municipalities throughout Pennsylvania, including Allentown, Reading and neighboring Montgomery County, have passed similar legislation restricting cooperation with ICE, except in cases of obligations under federal law.

Most so-called “welcoming” ordinances or policies bar cooperation with ICE absent a judicial warrant, and prohibit law enforcement agencies from honoring ICE administrative detainers, which are not signed by a judge. Many such policies also restrict local government agencies and law enforcement from collecting information regarding a person’s immigration status unless required by law, and prohibit leasing municipal property to ICE.

Delaware and New Jersey have passed legislation at the state level limiting or restricting local law enforcement collaboration with ICE.