Texas’ largest city has voted 13-4 to amend an ordinance that limits cooperation between local law enforcement and federal immigration authorities, as it faces a major funding threat from Gov. Greg Abbott.
Civil rights groups have called the proposed changes a “backdoor attempt” at repealing the ordinance, which the City Council approved 12-5 earlier this month. But under questions from council members Wednesday, the city’s attorney Arturo Michel said the amendment makes no major changes to the original measure. The mayor’s staff and the governor’s public safety office had negotiated the new language, Michel said, as some council members called the revision the “Abbott amendment.”
Andrew Mahaleris, the governor’s spokesperson, called the amendment approval “a step in the right direction.”
“Governor Abbott expects any policy HPD ultimately adopts to comply with the City’s certification that it would fully cooperate with [the Department of Homeland Security],” Mahaleris said in a statement. “Governor Abbott will continue to use every necessary tool to protect Texans.”
But in a subsequent interview with Fox News Wednesday afternoon, Abbott said the Houston Police Department “has not fully agreed to fully comply” with the contract for the state’s public safety grants so that funding could still be at risk for the city. The governor then said the police department needs to come up with directives that comply with the agreement, though he didn’t specify exactly which rules are missing or put them out of compliance.
“If the Houston Police Department does not fully comply with the terms of that agreement to detain any illegal immigrant they encounter and to notify DHS of the encounter, then the city and the police department still stand to lose that $110 million,” Abbott said.
On Thursday, the Houston Police Department issued a new directive that the mayor’s office says complies with the amended ordinance and the governor’s demand.
In particular, the new rule says a sergeant must go to the scene if there’s an administrative ICE warrant. The sergeant and officers are then required to ensure that individuals are detained “as long as reasonably necessary to complete the legitimate purpose of the initial stop or investigation and for other legitimate purposes discovered during the detention,” echoing the updated ordinance.
How Houston got here
On April 8, Houston’s City Council removed a rule directing police to wait 30 minutes for Immigrations and Customs Enforcement agents to arrive, if local officers encounter people with administrative immigration warrants during situations like traffic stops. The ordinance that replaced it also mandates quarterly reports from Houston police on its coordination with ICE.
But after Abbott’s office threatened to withdraw more than $110 million in public safety grants on April 13, Mayor John Whitmire — who voted for the ordinance — immediately backtracked and pushed for a special City Council meeting on Friday to consider repealing the measure. Whitmire then canceled that meeting a few days later because the deadline to respond to the state’s demand was postponed.
The City Council discussed for more than two hours during its regular meeting Wednesday the amendment to the ordinance, which Whitmire said protects $114 million in state funding and reinforces people’s rights against unreasonable arrest or detention.
“We have no alternative for Houston to survive,” the mayor said at the start of the meeting.
The ordinance says per the Fourth Amendment, officers can detain someone “only as long as reasonably necessary to complete the legitimate purpose of the initial stop or investigation.” The amendment strikes “only” and adds to it that officers may also detain the person “for other legitimate purposes discovered during the detention,” giving police more leeway for deciding when to extend the detention during these stops.
“HPD will ensure the policy complies with this reasonable standard,” the proposal added.
The amendment also removes emphasis that ICE administrative warrants are civil and that they do not by themselves justify a stop or continued detention by local police.
In addition, the amendment redefines an ICE administrative warrant as “an administrative warrant issued by ICE personnel commanding the arrest of an individual either to conduct removal proceedings or for removal.” It strikes out language that says these warrants “are not reviewed by a neutral magistrate or judge and are not probable cause for a criminal arrest.”
During Wednesday’s discussion, some council members said some of the additional language is vague. Council member Alejandra Salinas, who spearheaded the ordinance, also pushed for clarification on how the amendment would change Houston police’s procedures on the ground.
“I’m not aware of any change,” said Michel, the city’s attorney.
After another follow-up question, Whitmire responded that the amendment preserves the removal of the 30-minute wait for ICE agents. But he added that the revision gives officers the discretion to hold or release the person based on “reasonable consideration” and “the totality” of the situation. The mayor then said the explanations from him and Michel are “consistent” when Salinas sought another clarification.
Following the vote, Salinas promised to continue fighting on this issue, noting that the amendment doesn’t resolve legal concerns that she and others raised about the city’s cooperation with ICE.
“While I remain hopeful based on the City Attorney’s assurances that this amendment will continue to end HPD’s 30-minute wait policy and not permit HPD officers to detention on the basis of a civil administrative warrant alone, that language was struck by the Governor and Houstonians shouldn’t need to rely solely on assurances,” she said in a statement.
Meanwhile, other city council members stressed the importance of restoring the state funding under threat — even as some spoke about the importance of immigration reforms and the values that immigrants bring to Houston.
“Losing that funding would directly weaken services that people rely on every day. That is why this vote is not about the headlines or politics. It’s about responsible governance,” said Council member Joaquin Martinez. “At the same time, immigrants are Houstonians. I will continue to stand with immigrant families, support efforts that build trust between local law enforcement and the community, and push for policies grounded in fairness, transparency and dignity.”
A day before the Wednesday vote, Houston Police Officers’ Union President Douglas Griffith said he is in favor of the suggested changes, when read the proposed amendment by The Texas Tribune. The union had previously spoken out against the ordinance.
“It’s my understanding it’s supposed to comply with state law,” Griffith said Tuesday. “And as long as it does that and protects our officers, we’re good with it.”
On the other hand, Travis Fife, an attorney with the Texas Civil Rights Project, said the proposed changes would gut the ordinance. He also questioned why the proposal cuts details that inform the public about ICE administrative warrants.
“At best, it is redundant and confusing,” Fife said. “And at worst, it’s a green light to unconstitutional police enforcement.”
The ACLU of Texas, which has expressed similar concerns about the proposal Tuesday, reiterated following the vote that the adopted amendment is effectively a repeal. Instead of allowing police to focus on public safety, the revised ordinance leaves officers without clear guidance and puts them in a role that they are not trained for, the rights group said.
“Houston City Council caved to the governor’s threats and intimidation,” Caro Rivera Nelson, an attorney at the ACLU of Texas, said in a statement.
Funding threats elsewhere
Besides Houston, the governor’s office has similarly threatened $2.5 million in grants from Austin, as well as more than $87 million in grants and World Cup public safety funding from Dallas. These two cities also have rules directing local police not to prolong the detention of people during encounters like traffic stops for ICE agents.
Whitmire also said during the meeting that Austin and Dallas are in discussions with the state government over their ICE policies and will likely adopt language similar to what he had proposed.
The two cities didn’t immediately respond to comment requests on Wednesday. But Ramon Batista, Austin’s assistant city manager for public safety, recently told the Austin Current that the city is continuing conversations with the governor’s office “in a good faith effort” to resolve the issue.
“The public safety grant dollars are vitally important to our community — providing funding for things like victim services, timely processing of sexual assault evidence, targeted resources to address violence against women, youth diversion programs that keep kids out of the juvenile justice system, and cybersecurity enhancements that protect against cyber attacks and terror threats,” Batista said in a Tuesday statement. “The City must be able to allocate its resources in a way that protects public safety.”
Democrats and community organizations in North Texas also released a joint letter Wednesday pushing back against the governor’s threat to Dallas.
In addition, Attorney General Ken Paxton’s office has also sued Houston over the issue. No lawsuits have been announced against the other cities as of Wednesday.
Sam Stark contributed to this report.
