Thomas Tillis (R-NC)
Justice for Victims of Sanctuary Cities Act of 2025
A Republican bill with 11 Republican cosponsors · See all 11 cosponsors
Last activity — Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
In committee
Introduced and handed to a committee in the chamber it started in.
The committee holds it, and most bills are never heard from again. A hearing or a committee vote would be news; silence is the usual outcome, and it kills the bill without anyone voting against it.
Its path through Congress
- Introduced
- In Committee
What this bill would do
The "Justice for Victims of Sanctuary Cities Act of 2025" establishes a civil remedy for individuals harmed by sanctuary jurisdiction policies. It defines sanctuary jurisdictions as entities that restrict information sharing regarding immigration status or fail to comply with Department of Homeland Security detainers. The bill allows victims of certain violent crimes to sue these jurisdictions for compensatory damages if the harm resulted from a failure to comply with federal requests. It also includes provisions for waiving immunity for jurisdictions that accept specific federal grants. Additionally, the act provides legal protections for local officials who comply with federal detainers.
Yes· 3 of 4
- Scored +5
Does this give the federal government more power?
The bill expands federal authority over state and local jurisdictions regarding immigration enforcement and legal immunity.
- Scored +4
Does this tighten control of the border?
The bill strengthens the enforcement of federal detainers by local jurisdictions.
- Scored +3
Does this protect the right to fair treatment by the courts?
The bill establishes a specific civil remedy and right of action for victims of certain violent crimes.
The opposite· 3 of 4
- Scored -6
Would immigrants be better off under this?
The bill increases the likelihood of immigrants being detained or transferred via federal detainers through local cooperation.
- Scored -5
Does this leave more decisions to the states?
The bill reduces state autonomy by mandating compliance with federal immigration detainers and imposing civil liability for non-compliance.
- Scored -4
Would people in cities be better off under this?
The bill creates financial and legal liabilities for local political subdivisions, which often includes urban jurisdictions.
Who it would affect, and how
Potential Positive Impacts for People
-
Legal recourse for victims of violent crime: Individuals, or their families, who are victims of murder, rape, or specific felonies can bring actions for compensatory damages if the crime was committed by an alien who benefited from a sanctuary policy and the jurisdiction failed to comply with a federal detainer or notification request (Section 3(a)(1)).
-
Recovery of litigation costs: Prevailing plaintiffs in these civil actions are permitted to recover reasonable attorney's fees and expert fees as part of their costs (Section 3(a)(3)).
-
Legal protections for cooperating officials: State and local officers who comply with a Department of Homeland Security detainer are deemed to be acting as agents of the federal government, which provides certain protections in legal proceedings (Section 4(a)).
Potential Negative Impacts for People
-
Financial burden on jurisdictions through lawsuits: State or political subdivisions may be held liable for compensatory damages in civil actions brought by victims of murder, rape, or certain felonies (Section 3(a)(1)).
-
Loss of legal immunity: Jurisdictions that accept certain federal grants, such as those for public works, economic development, or community development block grants, must waive their immunity regarding sanctuary-related civil actions as a condition of receiving the grant (Section 3(b)(1)).
-
Potential liability shift in legal proceedings: In legal proceedings challenging the seizure or detention of an individual pursuant to a federal detainer, the United States may be substituted as the defendant, while the specific legal remedies are dictated by specific sections of the United States Code (Section 4(b)(2)).
Groups and Interests Ranking
Every group the model scored this bill for, from -10 to +10. Tap or hover a score for the reason it gave.
- Demographic And Interest Groups
- Would immigrants be better off under this? — The bill increases the likelihood of immigrants being detained or transferred via federal detainers through local cooperation. Would people in cities be better off under this? — The bill creates financial and legal liabilities for local political subdivisions, which often includes urban jurisdictions.
- Governance And Ideology
- Does this give the federal government more power? — The bill expands federal authority over state and local jurisdictions regarding immigration enforcement and legal immunity. Does this protect the right to fair treatment by the courts? — The bill establishes a specific civil remedy and right of action for victims of certain violent crimes. Does this leave more decisions to the states? — The bill reduces state autonomy by mandating compliance with federal immigration detainers and imposing civil liability for non-compliance.
- Social Issues And Justice
- Does this tighten control of the border? — The bill strengthens the enforcement of federal detainers by local jurisdictions. Does this narrow racial gaps in how people are treated? — The bill provides a civil remedy for victims of crime, though its primary focus is on immigration enforcement rather than racial justice. Does this change how police departments operate? — The bill imposes new legal liabilities on local jurisdictions and officers regarding immigration enforcement cooperation.
- 7/23/2026
- 1 Cosponsor added.
- 1/22/2025
- Read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary.
- 10 Cosponsors added.
- Introduced in Senate
2 bills Congress.gov lists as related to this one — companions in the other chamber, earlier versions, and bills this one absorbed or was folded into.
Ted BuddRepublican · North Carolina
Katie BrittRepublican · Alabama
Bill CassidyRepublican · Louisiana
Kevin CramerRepublican · North Dakota
Ted CruzRepublican · Texas
Lindsey GrahamRepublican · South Carolina
- Darline Graham
Republican · South Carolina
James LankfordRepublican · Oklahoma
Roger MarshallRepublican · Kansas
Mike RoundsRepublican · South Dakota
Tim SheehyRepublican · Montana