Republican Gov. Kim Reynolds signed an immigration enforcement bill into law that would make Iowa State unable to protect undocumented students.

The bill, SF 481, would bring the state more in line with national code by making it so local ordinances are overlooked when enforcing immigration laws. In other words, cities, counties and campuses would no longer be able to have policies that protect undocumented immigrants from ICE officials.

The bill passed the Senate on a party-line vote with all democrats and the one independent voting against it. In the House, it was mostly along party lines except for one Democrat voting for it and five House Republicans voting against it.

Sen. Julian Garrett, R-Indianola, who was the floor manager of the bill, said, “the bill serves to bring us in line with national laws and make sure that illegal immigrants who commit a crime are not able to do so again.”

The legislation is in response to a resolution passed by Iowa City that told local law enforcement to not help federal immigration officers with their duties unless it involved public safety.

Ames passed a nearly verbatim version of the resolution.

The floor manager of the bill in the House, Steve Holt, R-Denison, said that the bill was necessary as Iowa City was “in defiance of the rule of law,” and that “there is a potential for a San Francisco right here in Iowa.”

The Iowa City mayor at the time, Jim Throgmorton, said that the resolution was necessary to keep the city a welcoming and safe place for all immigrants documented or otherwise.

His position on this is similar to most law enforcement officials. The Iowa attorney general, Iowa County Attorneys Association and the Iowa Police Chief Association all oppose the legislation.

During debate, some Democrats criticized the intentions of the bill saying the resolution passed in Iowa City did not fall under the U.S. Justice Department’s official definition of a sanctuary city. However, this may be misleading as the Justice Department doesn’t have a formal definition.

This bill may have implications for Iowa State’s campus as well. Last year, the Iowa State Student Government overwhelmingly voted to pass a resolution in support for Deferred Action for Children Arrival (DACA) and undocumented students.

Rep. Beth Wessel-Kroeschell, D-Ames, said “If the bill passes it would make any previous immigrant protections moot, and that really could make Iowa State seem unwelcoming to new and diverse students.”

Student body President Cody West said he doesn’t think the Legislation will change the way Iowa State operates.

“Iowa State’s stance has always been to protect our students to the fullest extent to which the university is still abiding by all state and federal laws and procedures,” West said. 

Another member of Student Government, Sarah Moody, said she is unsure about the complexities of the bill.

“Students should have a right to an education, whether they are undocumented or not, and they should have the right to do so safely. The University’s job is to make sure students get an education. So taking away the ability of the campus to protect a student, like a sanctuary campus would do, is hurting their education.”

Wessel-Kroeschell said that her concerns with the bill stem from the “broad reaction” of the law enforcement community.

“Not a single law enforcement group is in favor of the bill because they believe it would break down trust in immigrant communities,” Wessel-Kroeschell said. “These law enforcement officials don’t want to do what ICE does because they know that immigrants will be afraid to report crimes when the immigrants think doing so will get them deported.”

Among other things, the bill would require local law enforcement agencies to detain any person in custody if that agency receives a request from a federal immigration official, despite that person being charged with a crime or not.

Local municipalities would also be barred from making policies that would discourage police from enforcing immigration laws. For example, departments would no longer have policies forbidding them from asking someone about their immigration status.

“Detaining individuals without charging them will most certainly lead to court battles and constitutional challenges,” Wessel-Kroeschell said.

Supporters, like Sen. Garrett, said these claims are “bogus as many officers already do this exact practice.”

Garrett also said the concerns around the bill have no truth behind them as the bill has protections for those who report a crime or are a witness to a crime.

“Studies show that in areas with these laws, everyone has the same propensity to report a crime whether they are an immigrant or not,” Garrett said.

The bill is set to be signed along another bill that would remove the sales tax exemption on textbooks.