This story was produced by the Berks County Bureau of Spotlight PA, an independent, nonpartisan newsroom. Sign up for Good Day, Berks, a daily dose of essential local stories at spotlightpa.org/newsletters/gooddayberks.
READING — Reading City Council is considering a “Welcoming City” ordinance that would formally bar local police from enforcing federal immigration laws or entering into agreements with ICE.
It would also prohibit city employees from gathering or sharing information regarding a person’s immigration status.
Mayor Eddie Morán, a main proponent of the bill, said the measure would ensure the city’s immigrant community feels safe and protected. It would also codify the city’s existing policy of not collaborating with ICE.
“Public safety in Reading depends on trust between our residents and law enforcement. That’s why our police department has long followed a clear policy — our officers do not enforce federal immigration laws,” Morán said in a February statement.
A few Pennsylvania municipalities — including Allentown, Lancaster, and Philadelphia — have passed similar ordinances. Several other municipalities have policies that prohibit or limit cooperation with ICE.
Some cities, like Bethlehem and Easton, have opted not to adopt welcoming ordinances, in part because of concerns that it might create conflicts with federal immigration enforcement.
Easton Mayor Sal Panto Jr. made a motion to remove such an ordinance from an August meeting agenda, saying it would bring attention “I don’t think we need.”
For Reading officials, the mayor’s administration, and advocates for immigrants, the potential benefits of having such an ordinance outweigh any possible risk.
“We want to make sure that people trust not only their government here on the municipal level, but also our police officers, so that they feel that they are safe and that we’re here to protect them and serve them,” Councilmember Jaime Baez, an advocate for the measure, told Spotlight PA.
The ordinance was introduced on Oct.13 and is on Council’s Monday agenda for final passage.
Council President Donna Reed said members will discuss the proposal for the first time during the Committee of the Whole meeting. Reed said she would like the mayor to appear to “explain why he thought this introduction at this time was important,” and is open to tabling the measure until that happens.
“I’m fine with tabling it to have further conversations … to get more input from the police department and from the administration,” Reed said. “If, for some reason, the mayor isn’t able to meet with us, for me, tabling would be important until he actually sits one on seven.”
What could a Welcoming City ordinance in Reading actually do?
The proposed ordinance would prohibit city employees and officials from inquiring or retaining information about a person’s citizenship or immigration status. It would also require city agencies to review applications, questionnaires, and interview forms used for benefits, opportunities, or services, and then eliminate any questions (not required by court order, or state or federal law) regarding citizenship or immigration status.
The ordinance would codify that the Reading Police Department does not carry out immigration enforcement and prohibit the agency from entering into any contractual agreements with ICE.
Reading Police would not allow ICE to access a person in custody without a judicial warrant, and would not continue to hold someone in custody eligible for release based on an immigration detainer or administrative request.
According to city officials, the ordinance would establish that city police are not allowed to detain someone “because of questions or suspicion about immigration status,” if the person was stopped for a traffic violation and was cleared to leave.
“Essentially, this codifies that RPD only enforces criminal warrants, not civil or immigration-related documents,” Managing Director Jack Gombach and City Solicitor Fred Lachat said in their joint responses to Spotlight PA’s questions.
Allegations that police violated the ordinance would be handled by the department, while the city’s Human Resources Department would handle complaints against Reading employees.
What a Welcoming City ordinance in Reading wouldn’t do
The ordinance wouldn’t prevent ICE from making arrests or carrying out immigration enforcement raids in the city.
A person arrested by the Reading Police and booked into Berks County’s jail system would not be protected by the law. Berks County complies with immigration detainers, and its prison board voted earlier this year to increase the time inmates can be held on detainers from four to 48 hours. When a person is arrested and processed through the county, deputies in central booking automatically run an immigration check and notify ICE that the person is in custody.
Berks County’s Prison Board declined to comment on the proposed ordinance, with officials saying they will assess its implications should it pass.
Compliance with federal law
Some opponents of welcoming ordinances or so-called “sanctuary city” laws argue they violate federal immigration law. It is an argument that the Trump administration has used to try to withhold federal funds from cities that have pro-immigrant policies.
Two federal statutes prohibit local governments from enacting policies that limit communications with agencies about “information regarding the immigration or citizenship status” of individuals.
However, those statutes do not require local governments to take any specific action to cooperate with ICE or officials to ask residents about immigration status, according to Keith Armstrong, immigrants’ rights attorney with the ACLU of Pennsylvania.
“Even though those statutes sort of get thrown about a lot … to pressure and misinform local governments that they can’t really take these actions, there still is quite a lot that they can do to protect their citizens,” Armstrong said.
Previous case law shows that judges have often ruled in favor of cities that limit cooperation with ICE and maintained they have a constitutional right to control how local police resources are spent. In 2017, Philadelphia prevailed in court against the U.S. Department of Justice, which sought to withhold grant funding from the city.
Richard Feder, former deputy solicitor for the city of Philadelphia and a lawyer specializing in municipal law, said courts often side with local governments on the issue of funding because there is no legal requirement for cities to cooperate with ICE.
“The federal government can only withhold funds from a local government if there’s a law that says the local government has to comply with this particular rule as a condition of funding, and to my knowledge, there isn’t any such law,” Feder said.
BEFORE YOU GO… If you learned something from this article, pay it forward and contribute to Spotlight PA at spotlightpa.org/donate. Spotlight PA is funded by foundations and readers like you who are committed to accountability journalism that gets results.
